I was reading a book about medieval demography recently, and it said in the 14th century the largest cities in Europe were (besides Paris) all located in either Italy or Spain. Why was this?
c. 1330, per Jean Bateau and Pierre Chevre, "La population des villes Europeenes de 800-1850" (1988).
1. Granada: 150,000
2. Paris: 150,000
3. Venice: 110,000
4. Genoa: 100,000
5. Milan: 100,000
6. Florence: 95,000
7. Seville: 90,000
8. Cordova: 60,000
9. Naples: 60,000
10. Palermo: 55,000
They didnt have the knowledge support large cities
because Islam :^)
Infrastructure and money
Mediterranean locations supported bigger cities. Without rail and plane, ship was primary means of travel. Thus spain and italy flourished
Because the big Roman cities where there and they didn't disperse into rural boonies like Feudalcucked Western Europe.
Because it's cold and there's no food in northern europe
Established infastructure to support these cities along with more fertile land. Added benefit of sea trade & therefore more likely to get a good job in most of the Italian cities. Also Islamic spain and sicily just were more urbanized than the Christian Europeans.
Because Southern Europe under Roman Influence became cucked and went from a tribal society to a citizen society
It was still the Mediterranean era
Before wh*toids ruins everything
How the fuck are Salonica and Constantinople not on that list?
Im not sure about Salonica but I'm pretty sure Constantinople in the 14th century was still somewhat recovering from the 4th crusade
The g*rmanic tribesman fears the civilization
Even recovering it still had like 70,000 people at the beginning of 14th century.
Salonica was huge and had between 100,000 and 150,000 people at the time.
Slave trade was enormous too. Large scale importing of slaves into Moorish Spain.
Obviously the frogs only gave a shit about Western Europe.
So exactly why was Paris the only biggass city north of the Alps, anyway?
>1. Granada: 150,000
>7. Seville: 90,000
>8. Cordova: 60,000
>10. Palermo: 55,000
Islam
>3. Venice: 110,000
>4. Genoa: 100,000
>5. Milan: 100,000
>6. Florence: 95,000
>9. Naples: 60,000
Latins
>2. Paris: 150,000
?
>Paris is not part of the Latins
What?
Being the capital of the biggest Kingdom north of the Alps and being located on one of the three main waterways of the country may have something to do with it, but it's true, if it hadn't been the capital of west Francia for some time, I doubt it would have grown so large.
the agricultural region around paris was very fertile as well
It's the 14th century, only Granada was a muslim city back then. The italian ones are all merchant states.
Also Constantinople and Salonika. The mediterranean basin was where the wealth and trade were at, plus it's the cradle of civilization. Both factors combined translated into urbanization.
It wasn't until the 16th century when the trend began to reverse, or rather the mediterranean slowly diminished in importance in relation to Atlantic and Central Europe as a result of the explorations and discoveries overseas and the disruption of commerce in the med caused by the t*rks.
Southern Europe was a citizen society before Rome
Mediterranean trade allowed a lot of grain to be brought in from afar
Warmer cities are more easily supported and populated, the Italian states had more money and were more advanced from a civics standpoint as was Iberian Islamic controlled cities. The Mediterranean cities were ports.
Fertile lands plus good weather plus better sea trade can sustain a population better.
Also Spain was invaded by Muslims
France was actually more densely populated than Spain, and similar to Italy. But those places were still much more urbanized.
It wasn't the only big city, just the biggest, Cologne and London also had 50k plus inhabitants.
Cologne, London, Novgorod, and Kiev all had around 50,000 people.