City states

>riga
>aka VILNIUS lite

Novgorod of course

A lot of Medieval Middle Eastern and North African powers were effectively city-states, like the Andalusian taifas, the Barbary states, the emirs of Syria, and the Central Asian Silk Road cities.

If my anthropology professor was right, there were city states in India as well. They just never created empires like European city states.

Supreme God Tier : Athens

Columbus was genoese

And thats about the only achievement they ever accomplished. Yeah and controlling some irrelevant plainniggers

>Venecia
Venecia is a tourist meme, Verona is the superior version.

>Not mentioning Rome and Carthage.

singapore and hong kong today

>Worldwide importance
Rome

>Continental importance
Tenochtitlan
Moscow
Novgorod
Venice
Milan

>Regional importance
Hanseatic League
Italian reinessance cities

umm where is Ahhens

Nobody cared about specific city states in Greece, what was important was the culture there

>let's see how wrong I can be

Delet this

>Riga

wuuuut

Freie Stadt Danzig / Wolne Miasto Gdańsk was too good for this world

genoese heavily bankrolled spanish and portuguese exploration, so you're wrong

Hong Kong is not a city state, its a province of China.

>Rome
>Trash city state

Bro they literally went from a single city to being the most glorious empire in Euro history.

East African city states on medevil times

eventually got bobbed by the Omanis, but yeah, Dar es Salaam, Zanzibar, etc. had a breddy gud aesthetic going on

DUBROVNIK BITCH

>who is andrea doria
>what is the role of genoa in the italian wars between spain and france
Yeah gj on that education

I've wasted so much time on Veeky Forums but this post made it all worthwhile.

City states are the comfiest governments.

The state is large enough to provide services to its citizens, but not large enough to surpress then.

>ywn be a model citizens in pre-punic wars Rome

>Nobody cared about specific city states in Greece
"no". Romans had a huge fetish for athens

>Novgorod
>Milan
>continental importance
these were only ever influential regionally. venice, genoa and florence had continental importance at varying times.

>No Ur
>no Uruk
>no Babylon

Pontianak was proper good

>Milan never had continental importance
People like you should be rounded up and sent to the gas chambers at once.
Milan was quite literally the center of europe up until the late 1300's as far as wealth, prestige and population goes. Set the standards of aristocratic living, clothing manufactoring, and public prevention of plague outbreaks.
We're talking Milan, the city which managed to beat Holy Roman Emperor Fredrick Barbarossa in the War of the Lombard League in 1175.
Fucking Milan, the centerpiece of northern italy, so important for both france and spain that they went to war with each other for almost a century just to control this city.
And then there's you, a kissless virgin on an anonymous bulletin board, talking shit about one of the most important centers of europe still today, comparing him to the likes of "regional powers" like mayhaps antwerpen or lubeck.
Just drink a tall glass of acid my friend.

Read Weber's work on city-states in Europe my nigga

>And then there's you, a kissless virgin on an anonymous bulletin board, talking shit about one of the most important centers of europe still today, comparing him to the likes of "regional powers" like mayhaps antwerpen or lubeck.
lol. please calm the fuck down, user. I had a slip of memory about the holy roman empire part and the textiles (they were also a major silk producer). Milan did have prowess, I agree. But you rarely hear about Milanese merchants abroad, but almost always about Florentines, Genoese and Venetians, because at their heights Venice, Genoa and Florence had international mercantile and financial empires. Milan had no such clout as far as I know; I only recall them having a smaller financial industry and an excellent textile industry, but even the latter was rivaled by Florence, Lucca and other cities. What made Milan such a contested city was its vital strategic location, where there existed within her bounds vital passages through the Alps. That's why the French secured it immediately at the outbreak of the Italian wars. The financial perks were an added benefit, but that does not tell us the whole story of why Milan was contested.
Milan's importance in history to me seems to be its regional importance. Its textiles were renowned the world over but marketed by other Italian city-states. All that money made the Milanese court for a great influence on other European states, but Florence and Venice had just as much influence in the arts and culture in general. But ultimately, it was Milan used its wealth for a bid to regional power, which they almost accomplished in the early 1400s. But for all the money the poured into warfare, they never were able to forge a lasting hegemony over northern Italy.

>public prevention of plague outbreaks.
A minor event in the scheme of things.

What modern day global cities do you think would be in this list now? Rotterdam? Singapore?

I'm saving this pasta, thanks user

>"regional powers" like mayhaps antwerpen or lubeck.
kek. Antwerp was an international financial center in THE international financial center 14th and 15th centuries, only to be ecliped by Amsterdam in the late sixteenth/early seventeeth centuries. Besides that Antwerp and Burgundy in general had a dynamic textile industry that was renowned throughout Europe from at least the 1300s. Lubeck was the leading city of the Hanseatic league, whose network spanned from moscow to bruge. It had a formidable navy, to boot, a navy which it used to coerce the Swedes and Danes into giving them trading privileges. So, no, the Hanseatic league also had international influence as well.

I am as well. Someone finally said it.