# VOTE! Most Historic City



## Matthieu (Mar 7, 2004)

This map isn't correct though, the violet part in France match the 100 years' war than England lost. I see the link itself call in anachronous though .


----------



## Matthieu (Mar 7, 2004)

This is a more accurate map (from the same link)


----------



## wjfox (Nov 1, 2002)

Yeah, the map I posted shows ALL the territories held by the British Empire throughout history
(not necessarily all at the same time!  )


----------



## Matthieu (Mar 7, 2004)

wjfox2002 said:


> Yeah, the map I posted shows ALL the territories held by the British Empire throughout history
> (not necessarily all at the same time!  )



Talking of British and the 100 years' war is even more anachronic because there was no British sovereign at all back then. 

It's like including England in the French Empires because Normandy took over it (and there was a kingdom of France back then and Normandy was part of it, than can't be said with England and Great Britain).

If I did the same work for France. Merging the two colonial eras, the Gaulish Empire of Postumus (including England and the Iberian peninsula), the Napoleonic Empire (most of Europe), Texas (yet it was ruled by France for a short time) and the area matching the Louisana purchase the world would be French for a big part too. It's just completly irrelevant.


----------



## jd_bond (Sep 13, 2005)

This is a joke, right! Why not vote your home town as most important historic city! If it were based sheerly on voting, none of the european city will see light of day. Get real, assuming your history as world history means nothing. When UK was land of neanderthals, there were tons of civilizations who were teaching physics in universities.


----------



## Hebrewtext (Aug 18, 2004)

Athens and Jerusalem contributed to the world the most :ideas, events ,beliefs, historic figures which overall shaped the world and the way poeple live today around it.


----------



## Tomasz z Wilna (Aug 2, 2005)

I am not sure,what a f.... London is doing in this thread?
xe xe


----------



## wjfox (Nov 1, 2002)

^ Oh shut up, for God's sake.

We've already explained the significance of London's history. You'd have to be ignorant not to appreciate it.


----------



## Forza Raalte (Sep 18, 2004)

I think it is time to close this thread


----------



## Sarajka (Jan 24, 2005)

I pick Istanbul. Not only was it the capital of most of the known world for most of its history, all of this is still evident there. The whole city is like a living museum of different eras. The oldest structures are still in use, etc. It's a living history. It's not dead, and kept on tidy shelves.

So Istanbul for me.


----------



## Finance Guy (Jan 21, 2005)

sorry... all wrong people... technically, the most historical city on earth would be Jericho. It is the oldest continuously populated city on earth! At least 5000 Years ( i might be wrong, could be 5000 BC...) . Middle east is the "craddle of civilization"


----------



## Faz90 (Aug 24, 2005)

Most historical doesn't mean oldest. It means most important in history. I voted Istanbul, but even London has the right to be on the list.


----------



## cphdude (Apr 18, 2004)

London


----------



## wjfox (Nov 1, 2002)

Faz90 said:


> *Most historical doesn't mean oldest.* It means most important in history. I voted Istanbul, but even London has the right to be on the list.


Exactly!!! :applause:


----------



## Taller Better (Aug 27, 2005)

Rome then Athens, then Cairo


----------



## leebuk2005 (Jul 4, 2005)

Queen Victoria and King George were Emporors wasnt they?


----------



## Taller Better (Aug 27, 2005)

leebuk2005 said:


> Queen Victoria and King George were Emporors wasnt they?


I wish there had been a delineation between ancient and modern history.
For modern, I think London has a pretty good shot at being the winner
in the world. America, Canada and Australia would certainly be FAR 
different countries without them, and imo far less interesting.
However, as has been pointed out many times here, London owes a
great debt to the Roman invaders for forging the city that we know 
today! :cheers:


----------



## Joya (Sep 3, 2005)

Faz90 said:


> Most historical doesn't mean oldest. It means most important in history. I voted Istanbul, but even London has the right to be on the list.


So why didn't they call the poll "most important city in history" ? and referring to this question, my answer would be: Istanbul, surprise hehehe !


----------



## GrigorisSokratis (Apr 6, 2005)

Each one of these cities played a major role in different times of history and each one contributed in a more or less degree in the development of what we are today. If you will it's like comparing (for you since are mostly soccer playing countries) Pele, Maradona and Beckham they played in different times with different styles.

Athens is the oldest of these cities and played a mayor role from 1700BC to 600 AD and again from 1800 to these days since in the 19th century it attracted the biggest thinkers of the time as it was considered the capital of Neoclassism like Byron, Delacroix etc to nowadays which is one of the largest metropolis of Europe with 5 million people and being the center of the Balkans. Also as well as with the case of Rome it's still one of the two most visited cities on earth for its historic importance.

Rome from 900BC to 500AD and from 1400 to these days. Anyway with should say that between the 500 and the 1400 though not the most important It still held a great role in history as it was the capital (in theory or practice) of each one of the western arisen empires. As well as with the case of Athens it's still one of the two most visited cities on earth for its historic importance.

London did the same let's put it from the Carta Magna era 1215 to 1900 AD being the metropolis of one of the largest in surface and population empires of all times as well as of great part of our contemporary civilization don't forget it's the cradle of the industrial revolution.

As for Constantinople/Istanbul it was the capital of the richest and most developed empire of Medieval Europe the Greek Byzantine from 500 AD to 1453. Then from 1453 to 1922 of the Ottoman the one who pushed the spaniards to look for an alternative way to the far east since they impeded the safe crossing of their lands, accordingly they stumbled across the Americas (ok the vikings did it first 500 years earlier but the spaniards did it kinda popular)

As for Cairo and Xian well for the former the only thing I have to say never played a major role in world history as we discussed above in earlier posts it didn't exist in ancient times not to confuse it with Giza and for Xian well it played a major role in Oriental history as well as Beiging, Mongolia (maybe Ulaan Bator), Edo, Osaka, Kamakura, etc.

Finally should say that in this list we should add two more cities:

New York which played a leading role in history from 1609 AD to our very days, since even from 1650 it was the most cosmopolitan town on earth (and still is), it was the center of dutch commerce in North America and despite the importance of Boston or Phily it was a center of trade from those early days. In the late 18th century was the capital of America and from 1800 the entrance port for immigrants in the USA and the largest on earth and all throughout the 19th century was the largest financial center on earth second only after London; and the largest from late 19th century to nowadays. And today well it's worthless to say it's the most important city on earth and we could call it the capital of the world, period.

And Madrid since it was the capital of one of the largest empires in history, the spanish anyway I should add that its importance lasted for a small span in the long spectrum of time just for two centuries the 16th and the 17th after that it was an ongoing declining empire, though it's out of any discussion that it left a clear seal in human history and the cradle of an important civilization like the Latin American, though nowadays it cannot be cosidered the capital of Iberoamericanism since it has a counterpartner in North America and that's Mexico city; btw another one that should be added to the list as the most important city of the Aztecs and afterwards of colonnial spanish-Americas.


----------



## Taller Better (Aug 27, 2005)

Excellent precis! Thanks for stating it so clearly!!


----------

