Why didn't Northern Europe have cities for so long?

Well they still lacked civ to make kingdoms and nations

>history works like videogames

Southeast Britain had towns of tens of thousands prior to the roman arrival. And stone structures too.

Obviously its not as impressive as Rome but you're artificially slicing up Europe here. Northern gaul also had some substantial large towns.

You romeboos are deranged

No it fucking didnt stop lying you retarded fuck

They had large settlements that supported tens of thousands which could pass the classification of being cities.

That said constant warfare, winters and tribal displacement made such places impermanent.

This guy is worse than that captext Arab tripfag.

>not automatically filtering out all name and tripfags

you guys deserve everything you get

Low population density

Much of it is already mentioned
>low density population
>resources spread over vast areas
>climate
>challenging terraine
>took longer for knowledge to reach Scandinavia due to the distance
In other words, information that reached the romans didnt reach the scandinavians until later

Fuck off namefag
T. Shitskin butthurt

t. namefag

>they grow food in 600 AD
kek, you're a retard, Germans were farmers who lived in small villages. Most people in the Roman Empire lived in small towns and the countryside. Only from around 1800, did the populations of the west change to predominantly city dwellers.

Then why they made kingdoms after they met the romans?

> The economy was mainly based on arable agriculture, as is attested by numerous storage pits. Wheat (emmer) and six-row barley formed the basic crops, together with millet, rye and oats, peas, broad beans, lentils, and gold of pleasure (Camelina sativa). Flax was grown, and remains of domesticated apples, pears, and plums have been found. Cattle and pigs were the most important domestic animals, followed by sheep, goats, horses, and dogs.

> en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lusatian_culture
People build with what they have, Northern people had wood and wattle, Romans found themselves sitting in Cement.

Any kingdoms?

Because they invaded Roman lands and inherited Roman infrastructure and language?

Let's cut to the chase and tell you the answer you want to hear. Northern Europeans are barbarian snowniggers and [your race here] is the master race and heir to the Roman Empire.

There's a few people some sagas mention as kings stretching all the way to the migration period. Following the saga of the Ynglings, there's a guy that was king of Uppsala around year 0

britain is not northern europe, mongoloid

it had the same stone structures as gaul and hispania, namely the oppida of the celtic peoples
mongoloid

Cities emerged first in the most fertile regions where populations were the most dense, like Mesopotamia, China, Egypt and the Indus Valley. Northern Europe began to practice agriculture shortly later than these regions, but it didn't have the same natural advantages that encouraged dense populations in other regions. Specifically it didn't have easily worked soils like the Middle East and the Mediterranean. The best soils in temperate Europe are heavy luvisols which couldn't be farmed with early scratch plows. Ancient Europeans were therefore limited in their ability to intensify agriculture, and despite building complex societies could not achieve true 'civilization', though in some cases they came very close (particularly in Gaul and southern Britain after 500 BC).

Cities spread from their places of origin out into neighbouring regions, through a mix of economic stimulation and outright colonisation, but only where it was possible for such cities to exist. So they spread across the Mediterranean, where the local soils could support large populations, but didn't spread into temperate Europe until the Roman conquest. The Roman cities in Western Europe could only be supported through their connections with the Mediterranean economy, and once the state collapsed they largely disappeared. Even under the Carolingians the region north of the Alps was almost completely rural aside from a few port towns.

What really allowed the rise of fully developed civilization in temperate Europe was the adoption of the heavy plow which opened up Europe's most fertile soils for agriculture. This occured in the Dark Ages but really intensified from the 10th century on, after which there was an explosive economic and demographic expansion which put Western Europe on a similar level of development as the other major Eurasian civilizations.

>4000BC Ukraine up to 30,000 people, equivalent to New York today
>not a city

This is not Northern Europe.

Also, these settlements lack the permanence, social hierarchy and economic specialisation associated with cities. Just because people are living close together for the sake of defense doesn't mean a higher level of social complexity has been achieved.

>tfw you put all the points into horny helmets and now you can't level up and become an empire

low iq

village life in comfy central Europe

The Germans built this in 600BC.

It became significantly easier to farm in Northern Europe after the invention of the heavy plough.

wow, amazing, not even sumerians could have done something like that

>moving goalposts

back to /v/

As much as I hate that shitposter, he's right, that's not a city.

whyy youuu haatee meee :(?

He didn't say it wasn't a city, he moved the goalposts to comparing it to the Sumerians for whatever reason.

I think they had the capability to if they were able build settlements like that.

I can't tell if this is bait or not. Why would they make "kingdoms and nations" if they didn't need any?
Go back in time to 6000 years ago in Scandinavia, freeze your fingers off, run from bears, hibernate all fucking winter and tell me if building your stupid LARPy kingdom is important to you.

Its fucking cold

of course yes, sumerians did that

low population density

brain drain. all of the great nordic minds were too busy being the ruling class in southern europe/middle east etc.

Lack of horse feed during Winter. After Hay was invented, Cities arose. The lack of knowledge of Euro Tech in this thread is troubling.

they hate cities anyway

Most of them didn't, calling your domains a kingdom doesn't make it one, they lacked shit that is used now to classify states, namely demographic density (and real cities), social divisions of a hereditary nature and a bureacratic apparatus, most places in europe didn't manage to become states until the low middle ages.

Sooooo true ... and we are not referring to his infant industries (wrong) and implications on protestant religion and trust (somehow right) thesis