Largest European Cities(agglomeration) in History 7500 BC - 2020. Top 11 biggest cities in Europe
Vložit
- čas přidán 12. 02. 2020
- This video shows the most populated cities(agglomeration) in Europe through history from the first civilizations until nowadays.
This video shows the European history about the top 11 largest cities by population in European history from 7000 BC to current year 2020. This video shows Europe's largest city ancient history and demographics from 7000 BC to present year 2020.
The Population of these european cities is noted as per historical data and slight mistakes and fluctuations are possible as this data is very old and exact numbers is impossible but after many days of continuous research I have compiled this video and provided my best effort to make this data as accurate as possible, also the cities flags are given according to the today's current location of cities and for people to better understand as all of them are not historians and also because some of ancient flags are missing.
I use Alien Art Charts to make those videos, use this link alienart.io/?referer=626917e1... to make similar videos as mine.
*****
Sources:
-Colin McEvedy & Richard Jones (1978), Atlas of World Population History
www.amazon.com/Atlas-World-Po...
-Angus Maddison (2003), Historical Statistic for the World Economy
www.rug.nl/ggdc/historicaldev...
-Hohenberg and Lees
www.jstor.org/stable/494924?s...
-www.worldbank.org/
-www.oecd.org/
-www.un.org/en
.
Copyright Disclaimer Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for "fair use" for purposes such as criticism, commenting, Music, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statutes that might otherwise be infringing. Non-profit, educational, or personal use tips the balance in favor of fair use.
Reference:
support.google.com/youtube/th...
www.multiplechronicconditions...
bit.ly/3l8GUbc
Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976:
www.copyright.gov/fair-use/mo...
www.copyright.gov/title17/92c...
1)This video has no negative impact on the original works (It would actually be positive for them).
2)This video is also for teaching purposes.
3)It is not transformative in nature.
Rome was impressive it took 1700 years till another city was able to reach a million citizens again.
Rome was 50% of the world at that time
Barbarian invasions
@@jollybegood What are you even trying to say?
@@bujardoci7347 nah not 50%.
China alone had about 50 - 60m people in that time.
Rome was just so op
It's fascinating and impressive how many times Constantinople / Istanbul rose to the top and dropped right off the map only to rise back up to the top again. Really shows the historic importance and strategic geography of this unique city!
@@CroPETROforeverNBA I think he knows that Istanbul isnt Constantinople, what you dont seem to understand is that he meant that the same area that Istanbul occupies today is the same as Constantinople. So Campbells comment is correct, geography plays a significant role.
Also if we want to be strict while also mentioning an Interesting fact Istanbul became the official name at 1930 so the video should label Istanbul as Constantinople before 1930. Istanbul was the nickname of the city until then.
Also, I find it strange that Constantinople is the only city that isn't represented with a modern national flag of the country it is in today.
And calling it Istanbul from the reemergence on the list is constant (Yes, I just noticed that pun, but it was unintentional) with others, like St. Petersburg that never is called Petrograd or Leningrad over time. They seem to only go with what they are called now. I'm very skeptical "Durrington Walls" was called that 5500 years ago.
@@nickkounanos but under Ottoman rule it's name wasnt Constantinople either it name was Konstantiniye and u are right after 1930 become Istanbul which is name that called by folk not by rulers. and Crotian dude did u see Istanbul populations and now go check to Greece population.
@@CroPETROforeverNBA all nations and empires in the past were brutal and barbaric when they had enough power. don't cry here like a pathetic just because your country or your ancestors were literally used like a piece of toy by other empires in the past.
@@CroPETROforeverNBA Easy, dog. When Turks entered city, citizens' dream came true. They finally relieved. And they'll belong to Turkey forever 😉
The funniest things are today's flags of countries in cities from thousands of years ago.
And what flags must be for those cities 5-6 thousands years ago?
Oh yea. And slavic names of cities, while Slavs actually didn't exist. Amazing power of Indo-Europians
странно, что у всех городов современные флаги тех государств в которых эти города сейчас географически расположены или располагались, но почему то напротив Константинополя нет флага Турции
Good observation
Constantinopla foi herdeira de Roma, era cristã ou católica seria estranho colocar a bandeira turca
@@noorna7123причём тут христиане и мусульмане? простая историческая несправедливость... Константинополь располагался на территории современной Турции и значит флаг должен быть турецкий или тогда переделывайте весь список.... Неаполь в 10 веке не имел никакого отношения к Италии и Риму это было отдельное независимое государство и так по каждому городу
Its okey bro. We own and embrace the geography we live in and everyone who lived here before us. We respect them very much. We do not like people who are not Turks and attribute everything to the religious war, but there is no problem, we have carried the whole legacy beautifully until today and we will carry it forever. Thank you for your objective perspective.
It is important to differentiate between metropolitan areas and cities. Paris has just over 2 million citizens, but its metropolitan area exceeds 12 million. Madrid has 3,305,408 citizens while its metropolitan area is just over 5 million and the province is close to 7 million. All the data are mixed.
Exactly. Bucharest alone has 2m, but it's metropolitan area has only 2.5m, so this city should have been on the list
@MarcT difference between definitive London (Greater London) and London Metropoliton area is relatively small compared to Paris and the city you named, but yeah the data used is clearly inconsistent between the two definitions
Yeah that's right many people mistake this two words
not really because some countries have very small citis but their metro is huge. like london citi has 30000 people when the metro area has more than 10 milion also athens the city has 600 000 people when metro has 3.5 milion
@@panosxgrx5117 “City of London” isn’t an example of metro vs city area, it’s a square mile, ancient district that takes up a chunk of Central London. It’s confusing given the name, but not a valid example in this context.
Can yall imagine what a ghost town most of rome would have been after its population reduced from a million to 100 thousand in like 100 years
More or less like Detroit?
@@adamcarrillo209 way worse...
The thing is, Rome was kind of destroid and split in parts so...
I think that the government of Rome these days couldn't hold their city together so the landparts that counted as Rome were not Rome anymore.
The popularity wasn't as small, but the region they were counted was...
I wasnt a town, it was half europe and northern africa
Fynn no this is just referring to the city. The entire empire had 100s of millions of people in it.
Yay, Trier! My home town. Reached 90,000 people by about 300 AD and was (according to this video) the second largest city in Europe. Something must have gone wrong along the way because until today they only managed to get to 105,000 people 😅
Plague, couple of words wars...
The rise of Trier was when it was the capital of the Gallic empire. The downfall happened when the Franks (people from around the rhine river at that time) who were in control of Trier descided to conquer modernday France and make Paris its capital.
So it isn't really that something went wrong.
I have not seen a dumber video on the Internet , there were no Ukrainian cities or villages until the 1900s . Because until 1300 all the lands from Poland to the Volga region were considered Russian . The land that was constantly conquered by the Russians, then the Poles, historically became independent just because of the unwillingness of either Poland or Russia to cede this territory to each other (the territory of today's Ukraine), so looking for Ukrainian villages in ancient times is like looking for photos of dinosaurs playing PlayStation.
@@user-muserf I don't care enough about Russia to look up whether you're right, but I kinda doubt it. Because there was no Russia nor any other modern nation in ancient times... so no difference
очень впечатляет рост населения Ленинграда с 1941 по 1943. Прости им, ибо не ведают что творят
данные наверняка по переписям 1939 и 1959 гг, а между ними пропорциональный рост. Невзможно по всем городам брать строгую годовую статистику
Ещё реальная ржака - древние сёла под украинским флагом 😂
Во-первых, таких данных не существует и, видимо, идиот делавший видео повелся на укропских псевдоисториков, во-вторых, выбор флага исходя из нынешнего административного подчинения более чем сомнителен
ruZZia is a terrorist state.
А украинские города, за 7500л до нашей эры?
@@valiusvideo9212😂😂 в ролике правда начинается только с момента нашей эры , удивительно что там городища древних скайуокеров не показали . 😂😂
The year -5050: the 10th largest city in Europe is 17 people. The lack of data is very strong, I think it's not a unreasonable guess that at that time there be at least a few dozens (if not thousands) of settlements in Europe with 17 or more people.
Understanable error methink, there isn't even any homo sapiens in my island back then
These are probably known "cities" . I am sure there are plenty of other larger cities, but they need evidence to archeological evidence support it.
its a miracle, remain every 10. years data to this youtuber from - 1200
Too Hip Hop is absolutely right . How can he possibly know that the population in 5050 BC was 17 ? It wouldn't even be clear that a certain year was 5050 BC ! That may seem strange, but the BC system wasn't established until centuries after Christ was born (it couldn't have been, could it ?). And nobody is really sure even now what year Christ was born, despite quite a bit of written evidence compared to most events, and a huge amount of interest. You only have to be a couple of years out with 5050 BC , and the population could easily have gone up to 20 or down to 14. Apart from anything else !
most of these data visualizations use extrapolations to fill in data from between two points in time. we couldn’t know for certain what the population was at exactly that date, so we make guesses based on dates that we do know. this is also apparent when rome’s population is falling. note the sudden change in rate of decline when the population hits 100,000.
Athens has made a massive comeback . It went from almost 400,000 in ancient times to just about 8000 in the early 1800’s, now at almost 4 million
The sudden massive expansion really shows in the city
Athens grew by a lot after the Anatolian Catastrophe. More than a million Greeks were genocided by the Turks and more than 1,2 million managed to get to Greece as refugees (hundreds of thousands more to other countries like the Soviet Union or Syria). Many of those refugees settled in Athens and so the city immediately jumped to more than a million people.
@@georgios_5342 yeah turk killed 20 million greek
True, I feel like there’s an unspoken commonality with people living in Athens, our roots are always from a different part of Greece, making Athens the fusion of all different regions
the whole West is the fruit of Greek and Roman culture
I found it super interesting.
One note, you have counted the metropolitan areas as a very big thing, at least in Barcelona or Madrid, you have counted its entire region, 311 municipalities in Barcelona instead of the 36 that make up its urban area.
I also found it amazing when I saw Athens go from 400,000 inhabitants to only 40,000 in just 380 years. But then I saw Rome go from a million inhabitants to 50,000 inhabitants in 560 years and I was even more surprised. I thought cities maintained their population better over time (at least cities haven't lost population for a long time now)…
I also liked to know how many inhabitants the cities had when they decided to inaugurate their metro services (of course you considered an area much larger than the urban area of the city itself).
London 1863: 2.93 million
Paris 1900: 3.34 million
Berlin: 1902: 2.83 million
both rome and athens were dependent for their size on the concentration of resources of the empires they were at the centers of. so when they loose the connection to those empires, they crumble rapidly since they cannot feed their own populations and people flee
@@federubio2519 i dont think athens had much of an empire but it was still the biggest player in greece before sparta and macedon crushed it.
A SEA EMPIRE. AS WELL AS KNOSSO, CARTHAGO VENICE AND AMSTERDAM @@joeljustjazzing
I have not seen a dumber video on the Internet , there were no Ukrainian cities or villages until the 1900s . Because until 1300 all the lands from Poland to the Volga region were considered Russian . The land that was constantly conquered by the Russians, then the Poles, historically became independent just because of the unwillingness of either Poland or Russia to cede this territory to each other (the territory of today's Ukraine), so looking for Ukrainian villages in ancient times is like looking for photos of dinosaurs playing PlayStation.
Your note is incorrect. It's not about the area, it's about the density. Spain tends to micro-separate his cities in tiny municipalities, so the cities tend to show a lower population than what they really had. The video is correct.
It's truly amazing how accurately they counted each town's citizens even back then isn't it. 🤣
I think here's a bit of a mess up conflating cities, urban areas, metropolitan areas, regions, etc... For example, the London population shown is that of the city (as in municipality, not the City of London) itself, while for Paris it includes the Metro Area, as Paris as a city has between 2 and 3M. For Madrid and Barcelona you picked the whole province, etc. I don't know the criteria for the rest but that information is inaccurate. (Source: I'm one of the 3 million inhabitants of Madrid province/metro area that's not part of Madrid city)
Lisbon here also behaves pretty weirdly. In 1755 an earthquake killed up to a third of lisbon's population but here it just kept going up. I was expecting from 1755 for lisbon to just drop out of the list.
Milano as well...
Mucho betis y mucho madri ompare
Also the bubonic plague didn’t seem to really impact the cities
I mean Berlin between 1945 and 1990 is on the list, in a time where it was two cities. It’s very inaccurate
It must've been fascinating to visit Rome in the Middle Ages. A city that was once inhabited by a million people only to lose a vast majority of its population. The ultimate tour of ruins.
There are several Romantic painters that went to rome to paint the ruins, Hubert Robert for example.
I've thought the same myself. Not just alot smaller;
Kinda like Detroit.
@@mikeanderson2956 xDDDD
turkey is not Europe...get it right kid. There is no istanbul, just occupied Constantinople
What one also has to consider is the population density these numbers imply. Take Metro-Paris for example with around 11 million people: this is like more than one sixth of the whole French population clustered in one place. A similar scenario is true for London or Madrid. This also implies that most of the economic power is centralized as well, leaving many other regions in the respective country underdeveloped. In Germany, the situation is different. Here the population is much more spread throughout the whole country due to its federal structure (and of course historic reasons). Berlin accounts just for approximately 4% of the German population. Of course there are regional differences as well, but they are less pronounced. I think it's really interesting to see that these simple numbers tell us so much more about a country as a whole :D
Our continent is truly amazing. With this presentation you can literally observe the very beginnings, the Greek domination, the Rome domination, basically Greco-Roman culture, present for centuries and centuries, then the disappearance of old world, Rome must have been as if we would as if we would imagine today abandoned NYC in ruins with simple housing and people beside grandiose ruin buildings. Both fascinating and scary how long it took old cities to recover, basically its only quite recent that happened, its mind blowing. We can learn from history, we are now at the point like Rome was, I really hope we last and really hope we are not equivalently in some “405 ad” atm. I cant even imagine another dark age, how would that even look like and when on earth would we get out of it again. So, lets just love each other, i know we probably getting on each others nerves, everything seems like it’s escalating, but lets be tolerant,lets try not to vote for extreme parties (we know already that it never evolves into a good thing) and just have respect for everyone and we should be ok. 🙏 😅
The birthrate is what's going to cause the modern collapse. 70% of countries are below replacement already
I'm so glad italys populati9n will be 54 million by 2050. 2100 will habe 48 million and nigerial will have 300 million. All the mixed race and babies. So glad finally
I have not seen a dumber video on the Internet , there were no Ukrainian cities or villages until the 1900s . Because until 1300 all the lands from Poland to the Volga region were considered Russian . The land that was constantly conquered by the Russians, then the Poles, historically became independent just because of the unwillingness of either Poland or Russia to cede this territory to each other (the territory of today's Ukraine), so looking for Ukrainian villages in ancient times is like looking for photos of dinosaurs playing PlayStation.
@@benjamins8082fake news!!!
Wow Constantinople held the title of the largest city the most persistently, dethroned by Paris and london for a few centuries, only to come back for a revenge as Istanbul :O
Maybe in the past it did sense, but today having a population that has so many children is degenerative and dumb
@@lucciocalappa no avarage kid per woman is 1.88 in turkey but in Istanbul there are so many afghans syrians etc learn before judging 😉
@@lilibra6224 and you consider it something to be proud of? That was what i meant
@@lucciocalappa nah but that aint the turks reason are arabs afghans etc
@@lilibra6224 I don’t know the situation well but once I heard Erdogan saying (to muslim people) “Go in Europe and do 4 kids each, in two or three generations Europe will be yours”.
That’s the reason why, after the comment above, I supposed almost everyone in Turkey thinks good about that way.
Glad to hear it isn’t true.
So pretty much everything started in The Balkans
Yea ^^
@@matejbukovac4926 You mean native to Europe.
@@matejbukovac4926 its just a geographic location of those cities ur seeing on the vidio
Mostly Greece
No, slavs really weren’t there. The video shows the Modern city names. The cities of todays south slavs were built on foundations made by older civilization such as illyrians, greeks, dacians and so on
Thank you for this post
Keep in mind...the total land area of every "city" is very different. As in today, it's also worth keeping in mind population density.
There is something quite wrong with this visualization: it seems to just be using simple linear extrapolation since it doesn't show some well-documented population declines. For instance, the black death (1347-52) hit cities particularly hard, and killed somewhere in the neighbourhood of 50% of the urban population of Europe. Some cities (e.g., Florence) had documented numbers above 70% mortality). Likewise, Leningrad (St. Petersburg) suffered a death toll between 1-5 million during ww2, but this is not reflected here. Still, despite this criticism, it was fun to watch!
nerd
Also like Athens in 500-400 where it was the Plague of Athens and the Peloponnesian War.
And the Lisbon earthquake of 1755, which destroyed the city
It't totally unrealiscic video, the part before writing is simply fantasy (lie), but it's mostly unscientific all. Maybe looks good, but it's not true not real.
There were 30,000 deaths in Lisbon and the pop was 230,000 but because this was updated every 5 years it’s easy to understand why it didn’t decline as there was still population growth. It just slowed at that time
A small note: Constantinople became Istanbul only in 1923. Until then, it was still called Constantinople, even by the Ottomans
"Konstantiniyye" in Ottoman language.
Excatly👍
the Republic of Turkey was established in 1923
As a Turk I can surely confirm that. After conquest of the city Konstantinopolis(City of Constantine) name turned into Konstantiniyye form which meant “Konstantin’s (place)”
Apart from that many new official names were created such as Dersaadet (meaning gate of happiness), Âsitane(Sill of Gate) , Payitahtülsaltanat ( Capital of Reign) ,Derâlîyye (Gate of Great Empire) etc. This is how the name of the city was mentioned in all the edicts,official texts and records of the Ottoman Empire for centuries. Also some minorities had special names for the city as well. Yet, “Konstantiniyye”name was STILL there and was also used officially beside all these different names. Konstaniyye name always did exist and NOBODY was bothered from that name. Ottoman Istanbul or its people NEVER ashamed of bearing the name of Constantine. Therefore, there is no need for sensitivity in this regard... Also No single Turkish emperor was neither in denial of this name nor bothered to remove that name but Selim III and Ahmet III. One of this Emperors created an artificial name called Islambol and used this in official texts, though all of these files are in archives and exhibited to people today, and other guy printed Islambol name on Turkish empires coins. But after them, this temporary name vanished.
After regime converted to republic from monarchy; Istanbul name came but it’s not a newly created name either. Istanbul comes from Greek word “Stin/m Polis “ meaning in the city, to the city pointing the Constantinopolis. That n/m difference is just a little phonetic change between old and modern Greek.
So back then in empire, Stinpoli was just shortcut name of Constantinopolis. Because although there used to be settlements outside of city walls (e.g Galata) Constantinopolis always used for inside of City Walls (what we call in Turkish Suriçi which is about 1/25 of Istanbul) That’s why stinpolis (in the city) was pointing there. Because outside of the walls never called as Constantinopolis/Stinpolis. As they are both essentially the same thing, some Greek friends need not be bothered by usage of İstanbul name derived from Stinpoli. The same way, some minority Turkish fellows whome are being fan of so called neo-ottomanist ideology shouldn’t be bothered whenever they hear Constantinopolis name as if the new name not related to Greek. Because ottomans weren’t bothered either:) In fact contanstinopolis name given after Constantine in his honor, while he was a Latin speaker and didn’t even know Greek at all. Whereas the Istanbul name that we use now actually comes from Greek roots and it doesn’t mean any problem since there are also other Turkified names in turkey where used to be Greek name by origin. It’s quite normal. Still today in balkans there are etymologically Turkish named settlements and some of them are still in usage. You should get over with those .
Istanbul is a world city after all. The name of city could be anything but no matter. what makes it this famous is its history background not any name. Being a center for 2 major religions, being capital of 2 glorious empire. It is the only city for which so much struggle has been fought, the only city that has opened and closed an era.
How is it possible, I read a book recently, written in 1656 by Adam Oleraius, “Beschreibung der muscowitischen und persischen Reise” where he describes his mission to Persia. He talks with people in Persia and they call Turkey enemies and they call the city Stanbul. If it wasn’t a name how persians called it Stanbul in that time?
3:10
7th century BC
Syracuse🇬🇷 was not Italian but a Greek (Magna Grecia) city. Birthplace of Greek mathematician Archimedes
The same goes for all the towns in South Italy (aka Magna Grecia)
From Neapolis (Napoli) downwards:
Agrigento, Taranto etc
In this representation they used the actual flags, not the historic geography. For consistence it is better to keep this logic.
@@trattogattoOnly exception is Constantinople i guess.If only Turkish flag had been used.
I think a better way to display this info would be through an actual map of Europe and a circle around the city that grew and shrank w the population.
Also, if the numbers at the top change it really kills the context of having those totals. If the graph just always stayed with around 1.5 mil as the max then you would really see the ebbs and flows and things like how small the cities were during the dark ages.
Thanks!
Much much respect for Thessaloniki ! This city is not any more widely known to Europeans, however it secured a place in the list for a considerable amount of time. It was founded after the fall of Alexander's empire, disappeared for a bit and became important again for many centuries during the byzantine empire as the co-capital behind Constantinopole.
Best Regards from Thessaloniki! It’s Greece’s co- capital today and second in Greece by population. The city has been continuously inhabited for about 2.300 years in its current location but much older if we count the settlements which are now located in the city’s suburbs.
Reject Thessaloniki, embrace Salunj !!!
Long live Bulgaria! Remember 1015 and wait for the revenge111!!!!1
Well, I played assasins creed.
@@Gyatt_frfr are you utterly delusional or just a troll? Judging from the "111!!" can't tell.. In the chance that you actually mean it, stop threatening our peace. We have a chance to cooperate in the framework of eu and both Greece and Bulgaria should make something good out of it.
@@sarantis1995 He is a Troll Saranti, he has it in his name
At one point around 2,000 BC, all top 10 cities in Europe were Greek.
because they were recorded and others werent
@@ugurrr true,but also that shows how farther ahead they were at that time.
@@wakeno.6047 and their ego killed the trend
@@ugurrr The estimation obviously comes mostly from excavation sites and less from recorded data. They simply didn't find larger cities in Europe during that era
@@DrDoomsd Maybe, but it's not as if the archaeological record is complete. It doesn't mean that a large city never existed just because it hasn't been dug up yet.
A remark with regard to St. Petersburg. The siege of Leningrad started in 1941. In 1941-1942 almost 2 million people were evacuated. Plus those who died of nazi bombing, shelling, starvatioт, diseases etc. So about 700 000 inhabitants had stayed in the city by Jan 1944 (the end of the siege).
Who cares?
@@kozzak80anyone.
@@kozzak80It matters
It took until 1810 for Europe to have another city of 1 million people after Rome. Makes you think how huge Rome really was, considering there were a lot less people in Europe overall back then.
It’s amazing to see how much Greek and Roman’s city lasted
Crotonas, Syracuses and Sybaris were all Greek cities in what is nowadays Southern Italy, back then known as Magna Grecia.
Syracuse was not part of Magna Grecia. Sicily was already considered something else (Magna Grecia refers to the Italian peninsula!)
@@Giorma.u I'm pretty sure Manga Graecia refers to all Greek cities in Italy.
@@georgios_5342 yep but Sicily has started been considered part of Italy in the 19th Century, that's why this misunderstanding. While Itsly was Magna Grecia Sicily was Sikelia (in greek). The eastern part with culturally Greek cities, the western part with phoenician cities (like Palermo)
@@Giorma.u en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magna_Graecia literally the definition of Magna Graecia includes cities in Sicily. I know that Sicily is called Sikelia and Syracuse kids definitely a Greek city, it's even obvious in its name, which has an y Graecum
@@georgios_5342 yep Wikipedoa must be updated on this! I'm sicilian and I studied sicilian history at uni 😅 (the italian wiki is different on this topic btw)
I like the thing you named instabul to Constantinople before the fall of Byzantium
Its spelt istanbul..but you knew right 👍
i've been to a number of these cities on this list. interesting to see that thessaloniki at one time was that populous at the turn of AD
I was a college student in Knossos in 1100BC. The lack of air conditioining was really rough.
Jerry? Is it you? I loose my clay tablet with contacts in Labyrinth
I went in Knossos 3 days ago but didn't see anything
Back then in my heyday, I was a lecturer. I do recall a rather sweaty but diligent student who went by the name of Collins. This chap never raised the issue of the lack of AC during class, though. Back then folk just made do with what they had and didn't complain.
same
Record temperatures too because of global warming 😂😂😂
It’s insane that only after like 1700 years a city came close to the population of Rome
Many other cities around the world did though like Chang'an, Hanghzhou, Beijing, Baghdad, Vijayanagara, Agra, Lahore, Dhaka, Angkor and Tokyo.
Not in Europe
@@dwarasamudra8889 yes. But this is about europe thougu
@Clau007 it was the capital of the world lmao, it had unmatched power amd size
@@DR-fc1ey it really was not, they had no influence of anything outside of Europe and the Mediterranean
Thank you for your great effort. But if you may allow me, I see a contradiction here! When the cities like Cordoba, Sevilla and Granada appeared you used the Spanish flag which means your criteria is the present-day situation, while you used the Byzantine flag that no longer exists for Constantinople and same city appeared with Turkish flag when it was renamed as Istanbul.
Also, it's just nuts how Istanbul went from round 2m back in the 1960s to 15m today. That's just unfattable
urbanization. but it will fail all of us hahaha.
Rome, Mediolanum (Milan), Athens. They all returned to the top of the list after 2000 years. Incredible.
While Aquileia (5.01 one of the greates roman cities) is now a little village with no more than 3000 inhabitants. But it still has many roman finds.
@@Ilsindacodicooperville That's absolutely mad...
What a comeback! (In football terms)
@@Ilsindacodicooperville and don’t get me started on Sparta.
Rome is Roma and Athens is Athênai or Athína.
I'm not as fascinated by the growth of the cities as I am by the shrinking. Rome had a million people living there in Roman times (guess this also shows why they were called Roman times), and then it shrunk back to 40.000 and less, it must've been like a ghost town.
And then even before all that, imagine living in one of the largest towns, and there's only 50 other people.
After the sack of Rome in 1527 it went down to as little as 10,000.
It is like to see New York's population shrink from 8 million citizens to approx 100,000. New York would certainly feel like a ghost town.
@@MatheusGalvaoS that would be exciting to see. And maybe historians will make the comparison between New York and Rome in the far future.
İstanbul🇹🇷🇹🇷🇹🇷🇹🇷🌉🌆
London has some pretty interesting convulsions population falls from 9.5million to 7million in the later half of the 20th century and then ramps all the way back up in the 21st.
Massillia (Marseille) was one of the most important city above Greek Empire, one of the most powerful west harbor of the mediterranean sea. It miss also Carthage if i am not wrong
Very well made🎉❤
2:04
Greece be like i own this list
Greece was getting more popular because ofc Greek Dark Ages
@@jcbw9975 Εμείς δώσαμε τα φώτα στον κόσμο
Italy and greece killled the list💥💥 amazing
Greece was in top 10 for almost 7000 years and still top 10 in 2022
Except they didn't. At least those cities pre 3000 BCE weren't Greek. The first city listed is on Cyprus and Indo-Europeans didn't settle Europe anywhere close to that years. This channel is just a Greek circlejerk.
@@minzblatt Cry kid.Cyprus was is and always will be Greek.Cyprus back then was Greek idiot thats why !
@@minzblatt why so jealous little turk?
@@minzblatt Knossos Mycenae Thebes etc was greek city states even the Italian flag cities like Syracuse was greek at that time....
@@minzblatt what is Europe? Can you search the root of the name Europe please? thank you.
Constantinople/Istanbul is impressive since 450 till 2020, on top of the list on and off for almost 1600 yrs. Just crazy to see how important that city is…
Look the amblem of Constatinople
It's interesting to see cities rise and fall so quickly
I feel like assigning flags based on the modern day location of the city creates some confusing situations. Like you have Sarai in XIV century pegged as a Russian city, and today it is one, but back then it was the capital of the Golden Horde and was completely of Mongol ethnicity.
Totally agree, flags are out of place here. For example Maydanets, although located in modern Ukraine, was not a city, but a village conglomerate, and was a part of Tripolye culture, which covered Ukraine, Romania and Moldova territories. So it's all very messed up and confusing for people who are not "in touch" with history.
Absolutely agree, but assigning modern flag gives the viewed quick feeling abt where the city is located. Not everyone wouden recognize a flag of Ottoman enpire, if there was one of course 🤣
I think flags are good indicators, because a lot of culture has been preserved and is now represented in those countries.
I disagree for one simple fact. It may be confusing to any historian, but to all those who aren't, which is a majority of the viewers, they likely don't even know what Mongolia is, let alone the Golden Horde... but Russia, on the other hand, is a very familiar flag.
Now, it's good to learn about history but to bombard the entire video with flags that don't make sense to a non-historian would not teach, and rather confuse many.
For example, the Greeks contributed a lot, financially, to build Rome. But, regardless, it would be very confusion to see the Greek flag, next to "Rome" as that name belongs to "Italy".
@@user-xw4mu6nz4t those who are not into history need knowledge, not this. There were no russia, ukraine or italy for example in 4500 BC. These people will think that ancient ukrainians is a real thing, not a joke. We will spread ignorance with this kind of misinformation.
St Petersburg (Leningrad) lost nearly a million people during WW2. This was not calculated in your numbers. But I did enjoy it.
@@sviatoslavkyshko4615 oink oink
Yeah, I too expected to see big drops around the big wars but that didn't happen. All in all, still a fascinating exercise even though I think it might need some tighter controls on the data to get a truly accurante portrait. Nevertheless, it's still very insightful and gives much food for thought.
and Serbia ww1
It also didn't show the drop in Lisbon in 1755 after the Earthquake destroyed most of the city.
You can also see how Berlin steadily grows from 1 million in the 1880's to almost 4 million when in reality it only got to around 2 million because there wasn't any space left and then it jumped to 4 million when the Berlin metro area was incorporated into the city, including some big cities like Charlottenburg, Spandau or Rixdorf (Neukölln).
Es increíble observar como a lo largo de la historia hasta el 1600, en el post Renacimiento aprox, las ciudades subían y bajaban su población..
Luego no pararon de aumentar sistemáticamente en general... Yo creo que luego de la explosión del siglo XX, es tiempo de que en el Mundo haya una baja significativa...y de cierta forma revertir dicha explosión.
Sdos ✌️🌍
its insane how much history western europe and greece and most of their cities have.
According to this video, St. Petersburg (Leningrad) population didn't change during the the blockade in 1941-44. It did. From approximately 3 millions to 550 thousands.
This is just an entertaining video
@@imperium_vox The entertainment largely comes from the purported accuracy of the numbers, otherwise it's about as entertaining as those videos made for babies, just colors and movement with a little tune in the background.
Damn, Rome 1 mil in 70AC. Can you imagine managing a city of 1 million people in those times. Madness.
cities skylines jesus dlc
They had incredibly poor sanitation and the worst traffic in the history of the world. It was a shut show back then.
@@BenjaminIMeszaros you dont know what are you talking about, Rome had a system of sewers and aqueducts and the roads were built as in modern cities the baths were open to all, and many people had water directly at home, in medicine they had antibiotic, antibacterial anesthesia, and surgical instruments similar to modern ones, a similar result was not achieved until 1800
The amount of poor people/slaves was big too. You could store many in a cabin with ease, tho slaves back then were often treated way better than average poor romans. Many were a symbol of status, even to mere citizens.
@@padriandusk7107 then the slave after years of works they become free and citizen
4:48 - If true, very interesting. The CITY of Rome peaked at 1.1 million in 90 CE, then started to quite steeply decline, even as the Empire continued to grow. Perhaps the City was just too large to withstand that many people. Might even be aftereffects of the Nero Fire. Even more likely, incentives were offered to those who would go settle somewhere else. One thing's for sure: when Marcus Aurelius died in 180 CE, ending the great century of "Good Emperors", the City's population was only 857K - a very significant decrease of 25% percent from 80 years earlier. The City of Rome was clearly no longer Trending on Ancient Imperial Twitter. We do know that the Antonine Plague ravaged the City in the 160s, but did it kill that many people? A number of educated guess as to why the 25% reduction could've happened, but I wonder if there is a certain answer.
Rome found itself at the border of the world of welth it itself created, soon many moved to central Europe or modern day Turkey, where things were happening and there were plenty of new resources to make one rich quickly. Lots of good smooth land. It was not the capital of the so-called Roman Empire (name coined in the Middle Ages) for the entire time of its existance: the capital was moved to other cities including Ravenna and Cologne in Germany. That answers your question, the Nero fire and other things are myths, the reality is that Rome was at the physical and economic center of its own empire only for a short time.
@@ClaudioViano Ravenna wasn't the capital till 408 CE, and "border" means at the edge of a nation. Rome was NOT at the edge; unless you think all of the West doesn't count. It does. In any case, none of that answers my question about what, if any, one specific thing brought down the City's population from 1.1 million in 90 CE to 857 thousand in 180 CE, when the Empire was at its strongest. I'm not interested in what happened AFTER 180 CE, and in fact I did suggest that economic incentives may have encouraged migration from the City. And sorry for using the term used to describe the Empire that was ruled by the Romans who had Emperors. "Roman Empire" is easier to say than: "That Big Thing in Ancient Times from Scotland to Iraq, from Morocco to Crimea". Finally, if you're going to suggest that the Fire in 64 CE didn't happen, you're going to have to cite your source. NO ONE who is serious disputes that the Fire happened. Finally, I must dispute your assertion that Rome was the center of the Empire for only a short time. From 625 BCE to the late Third Century CE (when Diocletian moved, and divided, the Western capital), is around 800 years.
@@classiclife7204 I live in Italy and I know how worth the position Rome is in is - not much. And yes I do know that there are maritime routes as well, only the one Rome is along of is not particularly worthy - too far from mainland Europe, it's no Venice or Genoa. Rome gained new importance in recent times only for political reasons, it wouldn't be the same hadn't it been choosen as the capital of Italy. I'm not taking anything off Rome, simply because at the time Rome was a people and not just a city.
i think I don't need to teach you that emperors at the time were called Princes, the entity that was later branded Roman Empire was being sold to the people of the time as an alliance of nations with a common defence system - of course it actually wasn't just that. I use the term Empire myself for simplicity, but I do know that it never juridically existed.
Regarding the "Nero fire", far from me the intention of denying it, it is surrounded by myth, starting from the allegation that it was started by Nero himself to the magnitude of the consequences it had to the city.
I'm a big fan of the Roman civilization and I believe that it never actually ended, just changed centers of gravity: Rome, Paris, London, Washington etc.
That's why I think that the fluctuation in the number of Rome inhabitants was due to opportunities moving around in its area of influence. In my opinion Rome's (as a city) drift to irrelevance started the day Vercingetorix surrended to Caesar, opening a whole new world to the Roman people.
4:52 Seeing Trier from this early on makes me happy (I’m from arround there).
It took 1700 years for London to reach a million inhabitants in Europe after Rome did in 100 AD. Goes to show how immeasurably magnificent and grandiose Rome truly was for its era.
But what's still crazy is that London reached a million inhabitants sometime just around the early 1800s and by 1865 it was 3 million! And by the end of the century it was at 6.5 million! That's insane!
What's even more insane is the fact tiny island great Britain managed to become more powerful then any other European nation
That's what the industrial revolution does for you...
Immigrants, that are still pouring in today.
Well, check out the rise of Istanbul in the late 20th century - that's even more crazy.
Industrialisation and immigration, yes, causing rapid increase... but also the way the city expanded naturally to include the surrounding areas, which were previously counted as separate satellite towns and then went on to become London boroughs. All of that happened very suddenly once the new bridges connected the lands south of the Thames (which weren't counted as "London" before). So it's not like there were suddenly 6.5M people. Many of them were already there but just being counted differently.
It's impressive how old Rome, Athenes and Istanbul are and they return from their past glory.
Amazing how you can see some of the historic events that took place like the collapse of Rome and Byzantium and the Black Death
Почему Константинополь и Стамбул разделили, а Санкт-Петербург и Ленинград не делили, и много других городов не однократно меняли название в своей истории.
Просто Константинополь относился к Византии, а Стамбул к Турции - Петербург всегда был Российским только сменили название города
8:48
Turkey:i am speed
Under Dragon Ottoman Empire coming
@@krenardoci4536 *POLISH HUSSARIANS WANTS TO KNOW YOUR LOCATION*
@@winogronkowa *THE GOLDEN HORDE WANTS TO KNOW BOTH OF YOUR LOCATION*
@@winogronkowa red russians knowing your location already ^_^
Ver mehteri
1st place Rome:
270 B.C.-450 A.D. (720 years)
1st place New Rome/Constantinople:
450-995 (545 years)
1.030-1.260 (230 years)
as Istanbul:
1.490-1.720 (230 years)
2.005-2.020 (15 years)
Total: 1.020 years
Now it's a bit overpopulated, not exactly a thing to be proud of
Don't forget Córdoba
@@austrianballproductions6832 why Córdoba?
@@LiveYourLifeWithJoy binlerce yıllık Tarihi olan istanbulda yaşamaktan gurur duyuyorum . Evet belki fazla nufusu var . İstanbul için gururlanmamak nufusun çok olmasına engel değil . Yaşamayan bilemez istanbulu
@@levi_irn isso é muito bonito mas não está a aparecer a opção de traduzir, se quiseres ser entendido, fala em inglês, senão, paciência...
Italy has quite the staying power. She never dropped out of the rankings from 1800 BC to today. That's about 3,800 years of being at the top of the urban race here. Good for Italy!
So Roman empire was Italian?
@@bohunter6091 ''Italia'' was the name of the province and ''italici'' the name given by roman government to the citizens of this province
Impressive how Madrid and Barcelona earned citizens in mid 1900 and became ones of largest cities in Europe
When they said "Glory of Rome" they really did mean the city itself not the country, at it's peak it was really 'the place to be' so to speak.
Absolutely insane amount of growth Istanbul had in the last 100 years
Half of the country moved there without any control in last 60 years, created enormous favela districts and collapsed the infrastructure & society
Turkey is pretty misogynistic and women are still viewed as baby machines. Their president, Erdogan, has stated awful views on womanhood and Turkish people still vote for him because apparently he represents the average Turkish person's beliefs. Result: Even nowadays, average child per woman is 4.1, one of the highest in Europe (if not the highest). Hence, the insane rise. Istanbul's growth is literally the result of controlling women and their bodies.
@@xyz-yu3xm No wrong. Educate yourself first before you write a comment like this
@@eren6362 yav he he..
@@xyz-yu3xm bstter u have 0 clue hahah hater
Ancient Greece: The larger the theater, the larger the population.🙂
Somehow I miss the Scandinavians. Didn't they document their population growth?
Constantinople has only been officially called Istanbul since the 1930s, I think. That's fine too, thank you.
Man you have a problem with history. Sarai was not russian city. It's holden horde.
I'm Italian, and I'm proud of Rome, was the best city in the wor...
Costantinople: I'm going to end this man whole career
Yes well realisticly Constantinopolis was just rome moved and given another name, all political people and supporters moved, wealthy moved, poor moved for easier life etc
@@smokybacon3662 thats propably why it collabsed right after lmao
Costantinple is nothing compared to rome glory
@@Cuoreromano90 WHAT?
@@Cuoreromano90that’s true
Rome's steady and rapid population decline started on the year 350 mark, around the same time that Constantinople experienced a surge in numbers, although it took 100 more years for Constantinople to displace Rome in the Number 1 spot. This is primarily due to Constantinople becoming the new permanent capital of the Roman Empire, although there are other factors like civil wars (Crisis of the Third Century and the wars of the Tetrarchy) and Emperors staying far away from Rome when on lengthy campaigns against barbarians.
Constantinople held the Top 1 spot from 450 to 1265, with a brief interruption by Córdoba from 995-1025 due to the latter being a political and commercial center in Spain. Take note that Constantinople's population decline itself started around the 1205 mark, just a year after the Fourth Crusade sacked the city, and Paris eventually took the Top 1 place on 1265, four years after the Eastern Romans retook the city. By this time the ERE had been reduced to just Greece and portions of western Anatolia
I think Rome lost 1/3 of its population due a plague twice
Lan o istanbul
Also, Rome's decline happened around then because that's when it started to really become apparent that it wasnt in a secure, defensible location and that was beginning to matter more than ever. It was also becoming increasingly hard to provide for a city of that size in that location when its countryside was frequently subject to raids (hence why it started becoming utterly dependent on Africa's grain supply, which the Vandals would later take control of)
I think it's also interesting to note that it took 1500 years for another European city (London) to reach the 1 million mark after Rome's population declined so heavily.
I found it interesting that right before Constantinople was founded, Trier was the second biggest city in Europe if the data in the video is accurate.
Proud to be Cypriot living 50km from the very first city Choitokoitia.
Spain was world power without even a big population. Thats impressive
It’s interesting to see each country taking the lead throughout the times… Of course this is just agglomeration it does not take into account other entry otherwise I think it might have been very different in some periods…
Oh and, we need to talk more about Paris, they stayed at the top for soooo long and kept rising even during the 100years war… it’s impressive considering that and also aaaalll the epidemic the Europe went through.
I have not seen a dumber video on the Internet , there were no Ukrainian cities or villages until the 1900s . Because until 1300 all the lands from Poland to the Volga region were considered Russian . The land that was constantly conquered by the Russians, then the Poles, historically became independent just because of the unwillingness of either Poland or Russia to cede this territory to each other (the territory of today's Ukraine), so looking for Ukrainian villages in ancient times is like looking for photos of dinosaurs playing PlayStation.
There was no Russia..the Kieven Rus were a thing long before the Duchy of Muscovy@@user-muserf
Nice video. Rome's decline in Late Antiquity is bit too early. Theoderic's Rome (490s-520s) was probably about 500000 by modern estimates. Rome's real dip in population was only during the Gothic wars (535-550s). But that is just a detail.
Basic rule is to have great shore of big sea or banks of key river on continent
P.S. One exception - Rome with awesome road system through the whole Republic/Empire
Great analysis! Is shocking to see how Constantinople/Byzantium/Istambul has been the greatest European city for 3 times in History!
You really start to understand the magnitude of the events of the time when you notice that the only period in the last few hundred years major cities like London, Berlin, St. Petersburg, etc stopped headlong exponential growth and in fact started to de-populate was right around 1935-1945.
You understand the magnitude of the Black Plague when cities are losing up to a third of their population
Oh yeah, something happened back then... Can't recall :D
London's absolute decline carried on into the early 80's & its relative decline into the early 90's.
London's drop came from people moving out and into the countryside
@@greghallett4410 White flight?
I wish it was a bit easier to read the names of the cities. While Constantinople was out having a comparatively massive population, half ofthe other city names on the list were pushed out of the shot to the point of being illegible. It's really interesting data, and I like seeing it visualized like this, so it was kind of a bummer to lose all of those.
I agree 100%. I appreciate the effort put in to make a video such as this, yet in the first half of it it's extremely difficult to make out the names especially if the ancient cities are unknown to the viewer.
They should've inverted the position of names and number of population.
I think you should first referece the city in its proper name. Extremely disrespectful to history.
Agreed, show the number in the row and the name to the right. Half the cities are currently not even visible.
@@vesislavazheleva9977 Should have been a little more effort in my opinion.
Barcelona 4 million? Where did you get that data?
Does Istanbul population include the Asian part, or just the European part?
It includes both.
European side is about twice the size of the Asian side (10 million vs 5 million) and also contains the actual city center and the ancient city walls. So the city in fact started on the Europe side and grew into Asia. And there are a lot of people who sleep on one side and work on the other. The city is actually a bit bigger than the official figure (estimated around 17 million) together with immigrants illegal workers and such..
Very interesting, just one point: It does not show a reduction of the population during the plague. In 1665 to 1666 in London alone, it is estimated that around 100,000 people died of the plague and many more left London for rural areas to escape it. Also 1666 was the Great Fire of London where many more moved away because so much of the city was in ruins.
It also shows the Black Death as being a gradual event that took around 40 years when in reality most of the deaths happened in a five year span. The software that was used probably extrapolates data between data points that are far apart, so you don’t see these kinds of events
The Black Plague was in 1346. The big one at least.
Greece staying in the top 11 for 8,500 years is impressive
That actual flag used to present greece is wrong bc it exists only from 1978.
But as usual it's not taken so serious with accuracy in respresenting the history.
Never believe the history unless u didnt create it (a wise man said)😉
Noone said it did. There's a bunch of flags and names in the video which aren't accurate. It's just made this way for simplicity.
The ancient Greeks were very impressive.
@@stevez8779 noone isn't a word....
Constantinople is same city as Istanbul for those who don't know. Why they were given different flags on this vid? I am not sure why.
Because none of the other cities had todays flags.
People shouldn't be biased.
Fun facts:
Milan was founded under the name of Mediolanum, or Medhelan, by the Romans in the first century AD.
Saint Petersburg was renamed Petrograd in 1914 after the outbreak of the Russian Revolution, in 1924 it acquired the name of Leningrad and it was not until after the fall of the USSR that it recovered its original name.
Петроградом он стал после начала 1мировой войны. Революция случилась позже 1917..
In 1914 - not after the Rev0luti0n, but after the beginning of the First World W&r. The Russians did not want the city to have a German name. At that time there was still the Russian Empire and St. Petersburg (Petrograd) was the capital. The rev0luti0n was in 1917. And in 1918, Moscow again became the capital of Russia (RSFSR), and then the USSR.
@@LanaLion517 ol'right 👍
@@LanaLion517 Yes.
Always remembered this passage from Will Durant's "The Life of Greece" about Sybaris, once the richest city in antiquity:
All went well with Sybaris until it slipped into war with its neighbor Crotona (510). We are unreliably informed that the Sybarites marched out to battle with an army of 300,000 men. The Crotonians, we are further assured, threw this force into confusion by playing the tunes to which the Sybarites had taught their horses to dance. The horses danced, the Sybarites were slaughtered, and their city was so conscientiously sacked and burned that it disappeared from history in a day."
Started Durant’s Hustory of Civilization during 2020 lockdowns.
Slowly working my way through it has been a joy.
@@brantlarson421 Really glad people are still reading him.
I guess the modern day equivalent might be something like the tanks or drones getting hacked to spin in circles, hah.
I am from there! no it's a shitty village with clearly not the same prestige
Ancient Rome had a population of 1 million. Its amazing that it took nearly 2000 years for London to become only the second city in Europe to do it.
and now 1 mil looks loke a joke
And London was once itself founded by the Romans as a provincial capital.
@@PickledShark I might be wrong or inaccurate in some way because I have very little knowledge of the Romans in Britain but were cities like Colchester or whatever it’s called also the capital for a short period of time
@@jwkkwu Castra, in Italian "Accampamento" was changed into chester. So every chester you hear comes from that. London's original name was Londinium
Va beh stai parlando di Londra, praticamente quando Roma governava il mondo probabilmente gli abitanti di Londra vestivano con pellicce e cacciavano scoiattoli.
This is such an interesting video
Crazy how the largest city in Europe for a time was located in a tiny little island like Cyprus. The current population of choirokoitia is like 600 people today.
Moscow has 13mil im city limits but 18mil in urban area, Istanbul has 15.5mil in city limita but 15.8mil in urban area, Paris has 2.3mil in city limits but 11mil in urban area…so these stats are not accurate if you consider city limits for one city and urban limits for another. Unlike the US, in Europe we don’t have city, urban and metro areas standardised, they are different from country to country.
if you count urban areas istanbul would likely to have 20m+ people even now it has 16m turkish citizens in city and it probabily has more than a half million refugees and other people
Yeah the City of London only has 10,000 people living in it! 9 million in what most people generally call London and 13-15 in the wider metropolitan area.
Это не Москва, это деревни возле Москвы)
The urban area (that the building continuity you expect in a city) gets often mixed up with the more modern concept of "Metropolitan Area", that is an area connected by modern transportation, services and economic ties that can also include mere villages. If you take metropolitan areas Paris and London are both around 14.5M, Istanbul at 15.5 (but half of it is in Asia) and Moscow at 20M. Also to be even fairer the german Ruhr Metropolitan Area of 10M should be ranked.
So the ranking should be as follows
#1 Moscow
#2 Paris
#3 London
#4 Ruhr
#5 european Istanbul
Correct. Madrid is 3m for the Municipality but 7m for the metropolitan area. I think metro areas should be taken into account in all cases. The massive Madrid’s surrounding municipalities accounting for more population than in the city would not exist as such without the main city.
I can't believe my island, Ischia, which was a Greek colony in southern Italy, is in the list between 2:28 and 3:08. It's a tiny island near Naples that's inhabited by 60,000 people today and got to 7,500 before getting out of the list in 690 BC. I'm from there and I had no fuckin' idea we were so important at that time 😆
Tu sei Greco ma non lo sapeva . allora lo conosci haja
Half of Italian area down below to Greece they live there after Rome grow they push Greeks back to Greece and some stay many leaves.
@@unexplainedwearenotalone3537 DNK tra Greci e Italiani da Sicilia sono molto simili in questo momento!
@Chizzel Wizzel yeah, surely the fact I didn't know my island was the n.9 largest city in Europe 3000 years ago means I never read books... as if every book in the world mentioned that information. Maybe you should read less and think more.
In 3045, a New Yorker will says "I had no ideas, my little city was so important in 21th century. Now the powerful city is EMC Elon Musk City on Jupiter" 😂
Seville, Granada and Cordoba, the beauty of Andalusia and Spain
Al Andalus
@@rzh6011 Andalucia
@@axwleurope9519 same thing
@@jaif7327nah it’s Andalucía like it or not it’s said perfectly by a Spanish person
@@Nicola_evans semantics semantics andalusia and al andalus are the same thing, most important is that they share the same meaning that is the lands of andalusia
It is very weird to think that a town like Ypres was bigger than the French capital back then
FYI - now part of modern Italy but back then Syracuse, Agrigento, Sybaris, Taranto all of these cities were founded as Greek Colonies by the Greeks
Ancient Greeks*
Athens should have a Roman flag during the Roman Empire then.
mycene was better
@@alejandrop.s.3942 "founded" and "conquered" are different things.
@@FranciscoJG Madrid as we know it was founded by Muslims (aside from some Roman evidences in several locations), should it appear in the video with a flag which isn't Spain's?
I don't know if you get my point. I understand what you mean, but it's trying to make a simple question too complex. And it's not a casuality that there're several comments of Greek guys commenting this very same detail. It's ok being proud of your history, but many Greeks whom I have run into in the internet are obsessed with these kind of things, as if there was a secret conspiracy against Greece. And this comes from a guy who's totally in love with Greece.
Imagine how much space there was back then compared to how crowded everything is rigth now
It’s what happens when people don’t want to talk about population control, and it’ll probably get worse😒
@@InfiniteApollo12 Leave the city and you'll see that the world is not overpopulated. Being in a city makes people think it is when it is not.
@@momentary_ If any, its about to be underpopulated, with birth rates plummeting worldwide.
@@momentary_ For real. Cities really do not take up that much land in the scheme of things. Drive through the U.S. and you will see that the vast majority of it is empty/farmland. Of course that doesn't mean that humans aren't negatively impacting the environment in a lot of other ways
*U.S. and probably most other countries except for like... City-states.
Istanbul used to called Constantinopole since 20th century, not since 14th
1820 until London took over from Rome, wow.
London population peaked at 9.7 million in 1936.
Then Paris, Moscow, Istanbul race (Turkey winning out).
Wow, changed my realization of how big cities are in Europe. I knew Istanbul was big but even being there briefly I didn't realize it's a city of 16 million people. I just assumed the largest city today in Europe was either Paris or London with Moscow or Rome at third place or maybe a city in Spain.
It is over 20m now.
Modern migration from the periphery has had a big impact on major European cities and Istanbul is, and always will be first in line.
Only half of Istanbul is in Europe...
@@Cosmopavone cry more pls
@@Cosmopavone sadece Avrupa yakasında 9 milyon insan yaşıyor bu bile ilk üçe girmesi için yeterli
Very nice and interesting video!
Most interesting for me were the rises of Rome (1st city with 1 million inhabitants at 70 AC) and Istanbul at the end!
14:43 constantinople return
İstanbul return
If Greeks didn't have Ottoman occupation, Greek population and Greek cities would be flourished and developed like Italian did
Why? Did ottomans ban having sex of greeks?😂
@@hakancankan2694
First of all the yenitsar camps wouldn't exist with all these non- turks soldiers.
Mongols picked up the kids of the autochthonous Greek people and turned them into muslim turks.
Nowadays Turks, you are the results of this kid-picking and raping of the Greek women by mongols. That's why you don't look like mongols today.
ISTANBUL IS TURK!
@@Lauraqwh
Istanbul is Greek with crypto Greeks habitants.
Historically Turks are mongol tribe.
I'm a historian ikr 👍
OK, I really do appreciate this video and all the effort that went into it.
The figures are a bit hard to understand though. According to Wikipedia the population of Paris fell to about 100,000 by the year 1422 (as a result of the Plague and the civil war) and reached 150,000 again by the year 1500. You put the figure for Paris close to 215,000 around the year 1422.
The city of Ghent, estimated at around 55,000 in the year 1500 is stated as 149,190, nearly 3 times that figure.
Britannica mentions that Paris reached the 1 million inhabitants mark by 1870. That just half of the 2 million mentioned by you.
And so on.
Another mistake which was confusing was that the population of Paris circa 2019 was 2.2 million, which the video was 9 million off of.
@@thecha4570 This probably refers to the entire urban area of Paris, all suburbs included. If the same area was used to calculate the population in 1422 the figure stated in the video would probably be right. The video description does mention "agglomeration". I can only assume that the present-day borders (incl. suburbs) have been used and projected back in time. Paris in the middle ages, despite very clearly defined outer walls, would not be just that area in this video, but Paris + villages/towns outside the city walls. People who lived outside the walls would not have been considered Parisian by any means, but I understand the necessity to add them nonetheless in order to make the geographical area coincide with the present borders.
@@thecha4570 I do wonder what they consider and define Paris to be. This number looks miles off.
The video says agglomeration, The number of the Ghent agglomeration is correct.
@@leonidasblue3973 That's possible, but the current suburbs of Ghent were mainly marsh or farmland back in 1500. Perhaps the author can enlighten us by explaining the figure.
What surprises me the most is how insignificant Rome was for most of the last millennium. I didn't think Rome was ever a small city, but it really didn't have a resurgence until after WWI.
It's basically because it was repopulated after 1870, when it was conquered from the Pope and made capital of the Kingdom of Italy. The choice of making it capital (Turin and Florence were temporary capitals after unification, despite Naples being the biggest city) was made explicitly because of the great historical legacy, even if it was a relatively small city before that.
Small but it still kept its fundamental role of capital of christianity. I say this as an atheist, I noticed that nowadays people don't really realize how impacting was the Pope and how strongly tied Rome was to its role. It might not have figured in this chart for a thousand years, but its power was dramatic
@@drummerdavide93 Wow that's pretty cool tbh
4:22 Is the french city "icum" Avaricum ?
That was TRULY FASCINATING . I wonder what Egypt looked like by comparison .