5 ms·

The largest city in the "middle ages" was in the US. Europeans trot that "no history" story out because saying "... and then Europeans engaged in the largest ge

The largest city in the "middle ages" was in the US. Europeans trot that "no history" story out because saying "... and then Europeans engaged in the largest genocide in human history" doesn't feel as good, I guess? There was definitely an interruption and a regime change — Europe's got a lot more of those a lot more recently than the US — but the history is there, if you care to look.

slashdev 4y ago
That's just factually incorrect. The largest pre-colonization city in the US was a piddling 20,000. Even Uruk in ancient Mesopatmia, was more than twice that size over 5000 years ago. Presumably you're referring to Tenochtitlan where Mexico City is today, which is neither in the US, nor was it larger than European cities at the time (although it was up there with Paris and Naples!)
- stryan 4y ago
  > That's just factually incorrect. The largest pre-colonization city in the US was a piddling 20,000 FYI, Cahokia was thought to have had a population up to 40,000 around the (IIRC) 11th century in Illinois.
  - ElevenLathe 4y ago
    For reference, Cahokia was roughly sited at present-day St. Louis.
  - eloff 4y ago
    That's the city I was referring to. The estimates I saw said 20k, so it depends what estimates you look at. It's still very small compared to other major cities of the time.
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
- pencilguin 4y ago
scythe 4y ago
The largest city in the Middle Ages was either Baghdad or Hangzhou, with neither European cities nor Tenochtitlan reaching half their size.
thechao 4y ago
EDIT: I can’t modify this to narrow the assertion to “… the US had a city (Cahokia) larger than its European contemporaries…” Also, all of the Americas gets historical short shrift from the old world: my point still stands: there was a concerted effort 500 years ago to exterminate the natives, and the results of that plan continues to this day when people say “X doesn’t have any history”.
- tremon 4y ago
  So, on one hand you acknowledge the concerted effort to exterminate the natives, and on the other hand you appear more than ready to ascribe the credit for the largest city on that soil to the USA? Isn't that just a little bit callous?

slashdev 4y ago

That's just factually incorrect. The largest pre-colonization city in the US was a piddling 20,000. Even Uruk in ancient Mesopatmia, was more than twice that size over 5000 years ago. Presumably you're referring to Tenochtitlan where Mexico City is today, which is neither in the US, nor was it larger than European cities at the time (although it was up there with Paris and Naples!)

stryan 4y ago
> That's just factually incorrect. The largest pre-colonization city in the US was a piddling 20,000 FYI, Cahokia was thought to have had a population up to 40,000 around the (IIRC) 11th century in Illinois.
- ElevenLathe 4y ago
  For reference, Cahokia was roughly sited at present-day St. Louis.
- eloff 4y ago
  That's the city I was referring to. The estimates I saw said 20k, so it depends what estimates you look at. It's still very small compared to other major cities of the time.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
pencilguin 4y ago

scythe 4y ago

The largest city in the Middle Ages was either Baghdad or Hangzhou, with neither European cities nor Tenochtitlan reaching half their size.

thechao 4y ago

EDIT: I can’t modify this to narrow the assertion to “… the US had a city (Cahokia) larger than its European contemporaries…” Also, all of the Americas gets historical short shrift from the old world: my point still stands: there was a concerted effort 500 years ago to exterminate the natives, and the results of that plan continues to this day when people say “X doesn’t have any history”.

tremon 4y ago
So, on one hand you acknowledge the concerted effort to exterminate the natives, and on the other hand you appear more than ready to ascribe the credit for the largest city on that soil to the USA? Isn't that just a little bit callous?