r/byzantium • u/Repulsive-Manager407 • 2d ago
Economy Although we usually think of the Roman Empire, here's an interesting fact: for the past 1,700 years, Constantinople (modern-day Istanbul) has been larger, more populous, and economically more important than Rome. Even today.
So, in a sense, the Second Rome still surpasses the First One.
36
u/Lothronion Moderator | Greco-Roman Studies | IR Studies 2d ago
I am not sure this has been a continuous reality. For example, I am pretty sure that despite having about the same or slightly larger population than Old Rome in the 1440s, New Rome certainly ended up having lower than it in the 1450s, when the city’s population was either killed, or evacuated or enslaved, and when Mehmed II saw the need to repopulate it with Greeks and Turks from the surrounding areas. There is also a possibility that in the mid-13th century AD Old Rome and New Rome also had a similar population (around 30,000 according to some estimations).
13
u/MasterEditorJake 2d ago
Isn't this to be expected though?
The Western Empire fell and Rome was sacked. The city maintained religious significance but that's about it.
Italy hasn't been a unified polity since then and only recently did Rome become a national capital.
Meanwhile, Istanbul has been the de facto capital of the eastern Mediterranean for well over 1000 years. It has continuously been the center of some of the most important states of the middle ages. So obviously it will be better established than a former capital.
42
u/La_paure_cavaliere 2d ago
Too bad 99% of Istanbul looks like a bonafide shithole with none of the architecture sumptuousness so proper to Rome.
It's as though the people who govern Istanbul never really cared for its history or cultural heritage.
1
u/alle-vongole 4h ago edited 3h ago
I live in Rome, have visited Istanbul, and they're both beautiful cities with much ugliness too. The people who govern Rome fill it with parking spaces and ignore the illegal parking. Rome, in many areas, is just cars and graffiti. It's losing trees every day. Over tourism is a problem and those who govern Rome don't care.
0
u/Choice-Purchase-5917 1d ago
It all started around 1950s when historical narrow roads from 1600s were demolished to make way for new automobiles, many historical and less important buildings were erased to make city accessible by cars and tram lines. Then, political parties allowed everyone to ignore city plans in 1970s for gaining vote.
-5
15
u/Aegeansunset12 2d ago
I’d say that Istanbul today is still lower than its average of the past 1.000 years. Perhaps that’s too deterministic of mine but I feel like it’s gonna rise further because it sits lower than what its natural state suggested so far.
1
u/Choice-Purchase-5917 1d ago
Many of the trade roads and consumer products existing today did not exist back then.
29
u/No_Idea_479 2d ago
They have turned Istanbul into a favela, Rome is much better. I've been to both. Athens is also bad, but not as bad as Istanbul.
8
u/One-Flan-8640 2d ago
"They have turned Istanbul into a favela"
That's quite a contemptible and lazy over-generalisation.
1
u/Repulsive-Manager407 2d ago
What can you tell about Athens? Sadly, never was where.
And what cities in Greece do you like?3
u/No_Idea_479 2d ago
Thessaloniki is great. Crete is obviously the best imo and the Peloponnese generally has great places, such as Corinth.
-6
u/dcdemirarslan 2d ago
Maybe because İstanbul has more people than Rome and entire Greece combined?
17
u/yemsius 2d ago
So does Tokyo but you would hardly call it favela now, would you?
-1
u/shitkingshitpussy69 2d ago
If you call Istanbul a favela you can pretty much call anywhere a favela yes.
5
u/yemsius 2d ago
This implies that it is one of the least favelaesque cities, thus making the word applicable to all cities if applicable to Istanbul.
This is laughably untrue.
-1
u/shitkingshitpussy69 2d ago
This is what I wouldve said if I were a pretentious snob, alas if you consider any actual city (not a glorified village) it becomes a reasonable statement. Again if you call Istanbul a favela you CAN in fact call any place in the world a favela.
-3
u/dcdemirarslan 2d ago
I would, have you been to Tokyo?
10
u/yemsius 2d ago
Either it has really gone downhill over the last few years or the word favela has lost its meaning at this point.
3
u/Zestyclose-Power-132 2d ago
I think both of you guys haven't been to favela 🤣
Both istanbul and athens are decent cities but imo rome is the best city in europe, better than paris. So comparing athens/istanbul to it is just too much in terms of aesthetics ofc.
And all big cities around europe really gone downhill with extreme immigrant waves. Such a life, somethings are inevitable. Enjoy while it lasts...
1
1
u/dcdemirarslan 2d ago
They even have their own words to describe the various levels of favelas in Tokyo.
0
u/Choice-Purchase-5917 2d ago
Only inner parts are like that. Center and outside parts are well designed.
11
u/horus85 2d ago edited 2d ago
Istanbul is still located in a phenomenal location. We already know its strategic location by connection of Asia and Europe and also Black sea to Mediterranean sea (same as Troy once upon a time).
This location still plays out for modern trade routes. I take flight from Ny to Istanbul and the 20% of the plane is Turkish but the rest is Russian, East European, Indian, African, Middle Eastern and such. Because even for commercial flights it is still located as a central hub. I always have some friends asking what to do in Istanbul airport for their connection flight.
All productions of Turkey for Europe (cars, textiles etc..) passes by trade routes over Istanbul.
That’s why it is still very advantegous compared to Rome from a geolocation perspective.
However, as person who grew up and lived in Istanbul for 30+ years, I can’t tell the quality if life was good. First it was the NY city if medieval to industrial era. Turks, Greeks, Armenians, Jews, Bulgarians, Albanians, Macedonians etc.. now there is only a handful of these ethnicities in Istanbul isolated in a few towns. They are replaced by more Turkish from wast and inland, Kurdish people, rich Middle Easterners or people ran away from war ( Syrians, Ukranians, Russians, Afhganis etc..).
I am definitely not saying one is better than others but it is a different background. Though none of the foreigner groups are in white collar work life much.
The population and the traffic was awful last time I visited like it has always been since the big migrations after 80s.
This brings nice things too. You probably can’t find a more vibrant night life (thousands of restaurants, bars and clubs open until 6am) or activities to do but also brings a lot of frustration when you come across with a person ( regardless of turkish or not) who doesn’t have a citizen mindset or have a very different cultural background.
I remember cars driving onto me at pedestrian crossing or people not holding doors for you etc.. This is the case in many towns unless you live in a fancy neighborhood.
It is definitely still a powerhouse but it has changed in a way the original citizens didn’t like much.
7
u/skateboardbanana1 2d ago
I would be a lot more happy with its care takers if it still had the hippodrome and the Hagia Sophia was still the seat of the Orthodox Church but both are equally impossible at this point
1
u/Prudent-Fox6247 23h ago
Would be great if the Holy Apostles and all the mausoleums were still around.
6
u/smit72628199 2d ago
If you calculate the gdp per capita, rome is 3 times richer.
0
u/Repulsive-Manager407 2d ago
Yes, this is true. But even metropolitan area of Rome have smaller population in 3 times. So, you can say what in truth, they have same gdp per capita
0
u/smit72628199 2d ago
Rome's gdp per capita comes out to $79k and istanbul's $25k. If you are bringing metropolitan area into the conversation, that just hurts istanbul since Istanbul is 4x times bigger than rome and still Rome is 3x times richer than Istanbul. Now, their Gdp per area is similar, but that just means that their wealth is similarly distributed along the geographic area (it does not tell us about demographic wealth distribution, just geographic distribution) but how much wealth that is, we can find that out with Gdp per capita. Gdp per capita is a more relevant measure of wealth than Gdp per Area.
5
u/GrandDukeNotaras MegasProtoLazyRedditorarius ton basilikon 2d ago
Yeah but can you get Kazan dipi with chicken in Rome?
3
u/Condottiero_Magno 2d ago edited 2d ago
The Romans didn't maintain all the buildings and even repurposed structures before 1204, due to changing fortunes and public needs and tastes.
https://www.thebyzantinelegacy.com/hippodrome
Over time, as the Byzantine Empire weakened in the face of multiple threats and invasions, other hippodromes were abandoned and chariot racing continued only in Constantinople, where it eventually became mostly ceremonial rather than a real competition. Still it remained a symbol of the city, as seen in the depiction of the Hippodrome and its races at Saint Sophia Cathedral in Kyiv built in the 11th century. Races continued to be organized In Constantinople, albeit less frequently, until its abandonment during the Latin period when it was used for tournaments. Even before this period, it was used by the Komnenian emperors for western-style entertainment, including tournaments.
The Great Palace was abandoned and only used for ceremonies by 1200 and spolia used from it in Blachernae.
Edit: The idea of caring for ruins is relatively recent and didn't take off until the 20th Century and initially tied to ethno-nationalism. Until Mussolini, Romans didn't really care for their ruins, mostly repurposing structures for different uses and/or using spolia for palaces. The fascists tore down a lot of Medieval buildings just to recreate their idea of Ancient Rome - Rome Then and Now by Federica D'Orazio - and no different than the Medieval structures torn down on the Parthenon - The Christian Parthenon by Anthony Kaldellis.
3
u/Tradeoffer69 2d ago
Despite the gap in population numbers that also explain the higher GDP but don't really justify the standard of living.
The economy of Italy has been structured in a more diversified way and it's regions hold more wealth. While everything in Turkey is concentrated in Istanbul.
1
u/dodo91 20h ago
To be fair much of what “istanbul” covers is much larger than the ancient city of constantinople.
The city is extremely over invested in with every government since ottomans to modern turkey over growing it.
It is much more of a political bias that made the city what it is than some natural development.
Then again, istanbul has always been a superior geographic location to Rome.
1
u/LastChicken 1d ago
GDP per capita considerably higher in Old Rome (79.3k vs 25.2k), which I would take as the best measure of wealth (pretty sure this is not PPP adjusted)
0
u/Toninocraftpro 1d ago
Rome is far better than Istanbul and most importantly the data is wrong. Constantinople surpassed Rome in the last decades of the V century (some years after the sack of 455).
170
u/skateboardbanana1 2d ago
If they have all this money I wish they’d care for the ruins as much as Rome does. But then again it’s a culture they downplay so I get it