VOTE: Most historic city

Here are the cities which received the most nominations this week.

Vote for which you think has the greatest history.



Rome, Italy


http://tinypic.com/be6o13.jpg





Athens, Greece


http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/3/3c/Athens_Acropolis.jpg/800px-Athens_Acropolis.jpg





Cairo, Egypt


http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/d/d0/Pyramids.jpg/800px-Pyramids.jpg





Istanbul, Turkey


http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/7/7f/Ac.sultanahmed1.jpg





London, England


http://www.willfox.com/images/london/toweroflondon/1.jpg





Xian, China


http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/49/XiAn_CityWall_DiLou.jpg

Rome was really the centre of the world for ages, so my vote goes to Rome

Plase explain WTF is London doing in this list!

ROME!

Plase explain WTF is London doing in this list!

Hmm.If you want explanation - Go to London.
-------------------------------------------

Rome.
London.
Athens..;)

Istanbul since it was one of the leading centers of the world since constantine revamped it. other cities sometimes sank very low and stuff (i don't know a lot about xian, so i dunno about htat city) but istanbul kept going.

WHY ISN'T MEXICO CITY HERE?¿?¿?

Plase explain WTF is London doing in this list!
:|

History isn't limited to ancient times.

London was an extremely important city in the 17th-20th centuries...

Anyway, my vote goes to Rome.

:|

History isn't limited to ancient times.

London was an extremely important city in the 17th-20th centuries...

The point is , wich is the most historic .
Couples of hundreds years doesn`t make it very remarcable on a history contest !
No offence but other cities should stay in the list
Anyway my vote goes to Rome

I'm gonna vote for Xian. Rome is important historical city for Europe, but Xian for Asia. Looking for poll - I think it's not really fair to put Rome so high and Xian so low. So I voted for Xian.

I voted for Istanbul!

The point is , wich is the most historic .
Couples of hundreds years doesn`t make it very remarcable on a history contest !
No offence but other cities should stay in the list
Anyway my vote goes to Rome
Right, London doesn't have a remarkable history, does it.

e.g. it wasn't the former capital of a global empire, the largest and most widespread empire in history, that spread the English language around the world. The Industrial Revolution never happened there. No famous Kings or Queens ever lived there. The English Civil War, overthrow of the monarchy, and establishment of the parliamentary model of democratic government never happened there. The Great Fire which destroyed four-fifths of the City was just a myth. The Blitz never happened, and the city's role in World War II was only minimal. No famous writers, artists, musicians, politicians, inventors, explorers, or painters ever lived there. The only historic monuments are the Tower of London and St Paul's cathedral, nothing else (e.g. dozens of medieval churches, palaces, castles, cathedrals, statues, monuments, etc.)

And btw, London has a two thousand year history, not two hundred.

It just so happens that the most important period of its history was from the 1600's onwards.

I'm not trying to say it's the most historically important city of all (I already voted for Rome, and Athens would be my 2nd choice), but it annoys me how you're so dismissive about a city which has been TREMENDOUSLY important to world history in the last few centuries!!

Cities (without any order) wrongly missing from this list:
Paris,
Mexico City
St Petersburg
Florence

My vote goes to Athens; it's apart from giza (your "cairo") the oldest city of them (though i'm not sure about xian) and IMO the home of the western culture.
And why St. Petersburg? It's one of Europe's youngest cites!

WJFOX2002
First of all u never had an empire , coz u never had an emperor ; maybe was a kingdom with the largest colonialist policy .
Second : for the same reasons u`ve listed above , Paris should stay on poll too
I don`t wanna argue , don`t wanna look anti brits ( a really like UK ) , just want to be realistic.

My vote goes to Athens.It was the birthplace of democracy and many modern philosophical concepts used nowadays in our society came from there.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Empire


http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/f/f2/British_Empire_Anachronous_2.PNG/800px-British_Empire_Anachronous_2.PNG

WHY INDIAN CITIES AREN'T THERE THEY ARE FULL OF HISTORY.

WTF IS LONDON DOING ON THE LIST.

Um, it's historic...

I abstain. I can't say -- all of them are historic, but all of them have been impacted by modern development.

And I agree with some of the other posters -- why aren't places like Mexico City, Isfahan, Delhi, Mecca, etc. on the list even though they all have remnants or intact structures from at least 300 - 600 or more years ago (particularly places like Isfahan or Mecca) and are current living cities (and I've been to these places and many others though not Mecca).

If anything, I would vote for Mathura, Uttar Pradesh, India -- continuously occupied for 3500 years and still has a good selection of temples and claims to be the birthplace of Lord Krishna.

And I have some reservations about Xian. Yes, it was the center of the world during the Tang Dynasty and it was very cosmpolitan (terminus of the silk road, so you see people from all over the world much like you would in present day New York or London). But beside that fort and a few bell and drum towers and a few parks, it looks pretty much like any other provincial Chinese city today.

WHY ISN'T MEXICO CITY HERE?¿?¿?

Cities (without any order) wrongly missing from this list:
Paris,
Mexico City
St Petersburg
Florence

WHY INDIAN CITIES AREN'T THERE THEY ARE FULL OF HISTORY.

WTF IS LONDON DOING ON THE LIST.

I agree with some of the other posters -- why aren't places like Mexico City, Isfahan, Delhi, Mecca, etc. on the list



I think some people don't get how the "Urban Hall of Fame"-forum works. First there are NOMINATIONS for more than a week :

http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=247558

Everyone can nominate any city they want.

Jerusalem,Kyoto,Paris,Madurai,Damascus....all got nominations,but not enough . So if you want your city included in the final poll next time you need to participate in the nominations. Because the cities with the most nominations will go to the final round. So there is little point in complaining about the fact that some cities are missing in this poll. You should have nominated them last week. During the nominations you can promote your favourite city in the "Discuss"thread by posting pictures... . After a week the nominations-thread is closed and the "final vote" can start.

This week you can VOTE for the : Most Historic City
and you can NOMINATE for the : Most Futuristic City

I voted London, not because it is more historic, just because I prefer modern history to ancient history. More my style of history really.

And I have some reservations about Xian. Yes, it was the center of the world during the Tang Dynasty and it was very cosmpolitan (terminus of the silk road, so you see people from all over the world much like you would in present day New York or London). But beside that fort and a few bell and drum towers and a few parks, it looks pretty much like any other provincial Chinese city today.

It was the capital of the Han Dynasty too, Han Wudi opened trading connection with the west and that's how the Silk Road you are talking about got started. It's also the capital of Qin Dynasty, hence the city also have The Mausoleum of Qin Shi Huang and his Terracotta Army. :)

The Shaanxi History Museum in Xi'an is also one of the biggest in China.

What the f*uck is London doing here?!?!

London?!?!?!? lollll give us a break...

ROME FROM THE LIST

WTF London is doing here ??!!!?!

Will you guys PLEASE shut up saying "omg lol, wtf is london doing here"

Read posts 8, 13 & 14 from this thread!! I can't believe how ignorant you're being.

For me it would be ATHENS

Dryden translates it most perfectly:

....

The Latian realm, and built the destin'd town;
His banish'd gods restor'd to rites divine,
And settled sure succession in his line,
From whence the race of Alban fathers come,
And the long glories of majestic Rome.

....

(Nota bene:, I have seen convincing arguments laid that the above lines are
a coded reference to the exiled James II. :) )

i think if we look at historical importance Istanbul wins. it was the capital city of 3 great empires and has importance since ancient times to 1900's.

Athens was very important and great city in ancient times but it lost its importance 1000 years ago or even before. same for Cairo.

Rome is still very great city but it had no importance in middle ages.

London gained its importance with indutrial revolution. Today its the most effective city in this list.

about Xian i dont know much about it. but very important city for Asian civilization.

Rome gets my vote

Cairo would outclass the others. Do you know why? the buildings like Acropolis, Colleseum, Pompeian THeatre, Empire States Building will vanish from the earth, but those pyramids, they will stand still!!!!!

Now we may pick Rome, because Christian World dominates the Pagan and Muslim world. Tomorrow if buddhist' s dominate, where will we choose?

What if Islamic world rise again? Shall we pick Damascus of Umayyads, or Baghdad of Abbasids? After the injection of Turkic Tribes from north east, Turkic dominations in Delphi, Ispahan, Merv, Constantinople?

These kinds of topics lack historical concepts. At the beginning you forgot to put cities like Karakurum (Mongolian Capitol), Perspolis, Ecbatana, Susa, Babylon, Hattusas, Ctesiphon, Damascus, Baghdad. As I have mentioned before, you are new guys, never forget it. Not even English, not even Germans, not even Romans, not even Greeks.

But there are Chinese, Persians, Egyptians, Sumerians, Babylonians, Akads, Hittites, etc...

These gave as much as Romans, Brits, Greeks. The most important fact is you are unaware of it.

Wjfox, Xian is only one capitol of Chinese. THere are other dynasties such as Tang, Sung, Yuan, Ming dynasties. Do you know the capitols of those? Do you know the Jurchid (Tunghus) domination fo Northern Hans, in Beijing?

It is really relative, to choose most influential city. First of all the recent dominator will always be most recognizable (New york and London), that is why we are wrinting English today. Not Latin. But we use most words from Latin. :D But what is Latin? most words are from Greek?

What is Greek culture? Off course they are the starters of science but engineering (applied science) was coming from Mesopotamia and Egypt.

Recent dominator is most recognizable, really, I saw a British pal claimed British Empire was superior than of Romans because they made railroads in Africa... But I know, Americans claiming their navy is the most superior (compared to Vikings, Athenians, Italian city states and British) because they have aircraft carriers...

Do you really feel yourself comfortable by comparing a city which was active 4000 years ago and a city which was actively dominating just in the last 300 years? These are two different eras. You can compare 1800s London to 1800s France. You can not compare 1500s Istanbul to 2000s New York.

But even if we continue this way, I would pick all Egyptian and Sumerian citites. They do not exist now, but if they were not living, none of us were here. We might still be monkeys...

Imagine Romans did not reach you Celtics and Germanics, and Nordics. :D Or imagine, Greeks continued the way Mesopotamians and Egyptians do, applied science and Thales, Anaximander, etc... did not create theorotical science...

It goes to the beginning, the very begining. Other theories are alternative history theories and these are out of Scientific scope...

But again, I support the idea of comparing countries, cultures, cities in one time point. Istanbul is today a big trash and mess, will that erase its heritage of 2 Empire' s capitol?

i think if we look at historical importance Istanbul wins. it was the capital city of 3 great empires and has importance since ancient times to 1900's.

Athens was very important and great city in ancient times but it lost its importance 1000 years ago or even before. same for Cairo.

Rome is still very great city but it had no importance in middle ages.

London gained its importance with indutrial revolution. Today its the most effective city in this list.

about Xian i dont know much about it. but very important city for Asian civilization.

Istanbul is a capitol of Two Empires. THis is a historical failure. THey think second Rome started with the disintegration of two parts.

Infact the main body was in the east because Constantine the Great carried the Empire to his city, Constantinople, in 320s... 2nd Rome starts with Christianity. Now many scholars think, 3rd Rome will start with Islam. So constantinople is the capitol of Christian and Islamic Roman Empires. Rome is the capitol of Pagan Roman Empire.

Athens is very very important for its theoritical sciences. If they did not exist, we would not have mathematics, physics, chemistry, etc...

Xian is just one of the zillions of Chinese capitols, there are many.

London 's importance, we are today discussing English nor French. :D

But all these were active dominators in different eras.

I know Damascus dominated Rome and Constantinople. Only Tang Dynasty was the equal of Umayyads.

I know Perspolis/Susa/Ecbatana (Persian empire had three capitols) dominated the world. The term empire came with Persians. USA is actually a Persian Empire for example or Roman Empire, or British Empire...

There are many many cities, many many...

BTW, Cairo is not Giza...

Giza and Cairo are like Ctesoiphon and Baghdad. PLease correct it...

Pyramids are in Giza, its the second capitol of Egypt. First was THebes...

Rome! Okay between the decline of Rome and the Renaissance it was only a small village but otherwise it always played a huge role in European history - and further on because of the Vatican.

BTW, Cairo is not Giza...

Giza and Cairo are like Ctesoiphon and Baghdad. PLease correct it...

Pyramids are in Giza, its the second capitol of Egypt. First was THebes...

I think you are correct here, although funny I have always considered Ctesiphon and Baghdad to be entirely separate but nonetheless proximate. Good point.

Rome :)

Istanbul is a capitol of Two Empires. THis is a historical failure. THey think second Rome started with the disintegration of two parts.

Infact the main body was in the east because Constantine the Great carried the Empire to his city, Constantinople, in 320s... 2nd Rome starts with Christianity. Now many scholars think, 3rd Rome will start with Islam. So constantinople is the capitol of Christian and Islamic Roman Empires. Rome is the capitol of Pagan Roman Empire.

Athens is very very important for its theoritical sciences. If they did not exist, we would not have mathematics, physics, chemistry, etc...

Xian is just one of the zillions of Chinese capitols, there are many.

London 's importance, we are today discussing English nor French. :D

But all these were active dominators in different eras.

I know Damascus dominated Rome and Constantinople. Only Tang Dynasty was the equal of Umayyads.

I know Perspolis/Susa/Ecbatana (Persian empire had three capitols) dominated the world. The term empire came with Persians. USA is actually a Persian Empire for example or Roman Empire, or British Empire...

There are many many cities, many many...

If you would permit me to disagree with you on a couple of points.

The Roman Principate of Late Antiquity had several administrative capitals. Before the founding of Constantinople, the great urban triumvurate in the Mediteranean was Rome, Antioch (the de-facto administrative capital of the East), and Alexandria. As is expected, all three were centers of Christianity, if you note that they are centers of major Patriarchates, along with Jerusalem.

Even with the founding of Constantinople, the Christian Flavian Emperors continued to use Rome as the seat of the Western part of the Empire. Witness the fact that Contantia (Constanza), wife of the Ceasar Gallus of Antioch (brother of Julian) and sister to the Emperor Constantius (son of Constantine the Great), was buried in Rome. Note that the Adventus of the same Emperor Constantius was celebrated in Rome as holding Primacy over the Adventus celebrated in Constantinople. (the source, I believe, for this is the sophist Libanius of Antioch).

It was only in the division of the East and West under the Divine Theodosius (Honorious in Rome, and Arcadius in Constantinople) that the distinction between the two capitals became more prominent. Although written as propaganda for the General Stilico, the writings of the poet Claudian make clear the careful precedence was observed between Rome and Constantinople.

Hence, to say that Rome was not a capital of the Christian Roman empire is not accurate. Both Greek and Latin sources agree with my point.

As for Xi'an, it is not one of the millions of Chinese cities. At its height, Tang Xi'an was larger than Classical Rome, Byzantine Constantinople, AND Abbasid Baghdad. It was the most civilized city of the most powerful empire of its time. After that, it did decline irrevocably, but it does not change the fact that it ranks as one of the greatest cities in history.

P.S.: Also, Milan was a great imperial capital of the Western part of the Empire, as was Ravenna.

Rome

Xian - whose history begins over 7,000 years ago.

Rome!

I voted for Athens!! Thats where it all begun. btw istanbul and Constantinople are not the same.

WJFOX2002
First of all u never had an empire , coz u never had an emperor ; maybe was a kingdom with the largest colonialist policy .
Second : for the same reasons u`ve listed above , Paris should stay on poll too
I don`t wanna argue , don`t wanna look anti brits ( a really like UK ) , just want to be realistic.


You could argue Victoria was Empress of India though.

Byzance/Constantinople/Istanbul for me

Athens :)

I'm going with London on this one. It's the youngest city on the list, but history is never about quantity. I'm voting for it because it lead the world as we know it through it's formative years. We are all speaking english now, right?

Read the book London by Edward Rutherford... a fascinating book that tells the tale of generations of fictional characters living in London since it was a bustling Roman outpost.

I think it would be unfair to vote for only one city since almost all of them are very important concerning the history of our civilization.
I vote for 3 most important cities though , who are at the same place for thousand of years...
: Athens , Roma , Constantinople (Istanbul)

for me it's a tough fight between athens and Xian.

the roman empired was based on greek politics (just to begin with).

Athens, know where else has so much intellectual thought and so many ideas that were at the time unique, coming from a tiny citizen population. Athens taught Rome how to live, it was only after the Roman Republic was thrown of that Rome became a visually great city, compared to the Greeks, those Romans were brutal and barbaric. Simply Barbarians with a constitution and literacy.

And if antiquity is no obstacle, how come New York isn't included, although its only four centuries old, enough events have taken place in it, why not include Alexandria, with a history far more illustrious than Cairo's, and a city that could rival both Athens and Rome in the High Ptolemaic Period.

Rome

Athens

Athens

Klesthenes and Democracy.
For those who know.

where is Jerusalem?

where is Jerusalem?


In mideast.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Empire


http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/f/f2/British_Empire_Anachronous_2.PNG/800px-British_Empire_Anachronous_2.PNG


WOW :eek2:




We the Spaniards also conquered some territories... :)

In mideast.
:lol:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/f/f2/British_Empire_Anachronous_2.PNG/800px-British_Empire_Anachronous_2.PNG

This map isn't correct though, the violet part in France match the 100 years' war than England lost. I see the link itself call in anachronous though :D.

This is a more accurate map (from the same link)

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/b/b8/British_Empire_1921.png

Yeah, the map I posted shows ALL the territories held by the British Empire throughout history
(not necessarily all at the same time! :) )

Yeah, the map I posted shows ALL the territories held by the British Empire throughout history
(not necessarily all at the same time! :) )


Talking of British and the 100 years' war is even more anachronic because there was no British sovereign at all back then.

It's like including England in the French Empires because Normandy took over it (and there was a kingdom of France back then and Normandy was part of it, than can't be said with England and Great Britain).

If I did the same work for France. Merging the two colonial eras, the Gaulish Empire of Postumus (including England and the Iberian peninsula), the Napoleonic Empire (most of Europe), Texas (yet it was ruled by France for a short time) and the area matching the Louisana purchase the world would be French for a big part too. It's just completly irrelevant.

This is a joke, right! Why not vote your home town as most important historic city! If it were based sheerly on voting, none of the european city will see light of day. Get real, assuming your history as world history means nothing. When UK was land of neanderthals, there were tons of civilizations who were teaching physics in universities.

Athens and Jerusalem contributed to the world the most :ideas, events ,beliefs, historic figures which overall shaped the world and the way poeple live today around it.

I am not sure,what a f.... London is doing in this thread?
xe xe

^ Oh shut up, for God's sake.

We've already explained the significance of London's history. You'd have to be ignorant not to appreciate it.

I think it is time to close this thread

I pick Istanbul. Not only was it the capital of most of the known world for most of its history, all of this is still evident there. The whole city is like a living museum of different eras. The oldest structures are still in use, etc. It's a living history. It's not dead, and kept on tidy shelves.

So Istanbul for me. :D

sorry... all wrong people... technically, the most historical city on earth would be Jericho. It is the oldest continuously populated city on earth! At least 5000 Years ( i might be wrong, could be 5000 BC...) . Middle east is the "craddle of civilization"

Most historical doesn't mean oldest. It means most important in history. I voted Istanbul, but even London has the right to be on the list.

London

Most historical doesn't mean oldest. It means most important in history. I voted Istanbul, but even London has the right to be on the list.
Exactly!!! :applause:

Rome then Athens, then Cairo

Queen Victoria and King George were Emporors wasnt they?

Queen Victoria and King George were Emporors wasnt they?
I wish there had been a delineation between ancient and modern history.
For modern, I think London has a pretty good shot at being the winner
in the world. America, Canada and Australia would certainly be FAR
different countries without them, and imo far less interesting.
However, as has been pointed out many times here, London owes a
great debt to the Roman invaders for forging the city that we know
today! :cheers:

Most historical doesn't mean oldest. It means most important in history. I voted Istanbul, but even London has the right to be on the list.

So why didn't they call the poll "most important city in history" ? and referring to this question, my answer would be: Istanbul, surprise hehehe !

Each one of these cities played a major role in different times of history and each one contributed in a more or less degree in the development of what we are today. If you will it's like comparing (for you since are mostly soccer playing countries) Pele, Maradona and Beckham they played in different times with different styles.

Athens is the oldest of these cities and played a mayor role from 1700BC to 600 AD and again from 1800 to these days since in the 19th century it attracted the biggest thinkers of the time as it was considered the capital of Neoclassism like Byron, Delacroix etc to nowadays which is one of the largest metropolis of Europe with 5 million people and being the center of the Balkans. Also as well as with the case of Rome it's still one of the two most visited cities on earth for its historic importance.

Rome from 900BC to 500AD and from 1400 to these days. Anyway with should say that between the 500 and the 1400 though not the most important It still held a great role in history as it was the capital (in theory or practice) of each one of the western arisen empires. As well as with the case of Athens it's still one of the two most visited cities on earth for its historic importance.

London did the same let's put it from the Carta Magna era 1215 to 1900 AD being the metropolis of one of the largest in surface and population empires of all times as well as of great part of our contemporary civilization don't forget it's the cradle of the industrial revolution.

As for Constantinople/Istanbul it was the capital of the richest and most developed empire of Medieval Europe the Greek Byzantine from 500 AD to 1453. Then from 1453 to 1922 of the Ottoman the one who pushed the spaniards to look for an alternative way to the far east since they impeded the safe crossing of their lands, accordingly they stumbled across the Americas (ok the vikings did it first 500 years earlier but the spaniards did it kinda popular)

As for Cairo and Xian well for the former the only thing I have to say never played a major role in world history as we discussed above in earlier posts it didn't exist in ancient times not to confuse it with Giza and for Xian well it played a major role in Oriental history as well as Beiging, Mongolia (maybe Ulaan Bator), Edo, Osaka, Kamakura, etc.

Finally should say that in this list we should add two more cities:

New York which played a leading role in history from 1609 AD to our very days, since even from 1650 it was the most cosmopolitan town on earth (and still is), it was the center of dutch commerce in North America and despite the importance of Boston or Phily it was a center of trade from those early days. In the late 18th century was the capital of America and from 1800 the entrance port for immigrants in the USA and the largest on earth and all throughout the 19th century was the largest financial center on earth second only after London; and the largest from late 19th century to nowadays. And today well it's worthless to say it's the most important city on earth and we could call it the capital of the world, period.

And Madrid since it was the capital of one of the largest empires in history, the spanish anyway I should add that its importance lasted for a small span in the long spectrum of time just for two centuries the 16th and the 17th after that it was an ongoing declining empire, though it's out of any discussion that it left a clear seal in human history and the cradle of an important civilization like the Latin American, though nowadays it cannot be cosidered the capital of Iberoamericanism since it has a counterpartner in North America and that's Mexico city; btw another one that should be added to the list as the most important city of the Aztecs and afterwards of colonnial spanish-Americas.

Excellent precis! Thanks for stating it so clearly!! :)

And Madrid since it was the capital of one of the largest empires in history, the spanish anyway I should add that its importance lasted for a small span in the long spectrum of time just for two centuries the 16th and the 17th after that it was an ongoing declining empire, though it's out of any discussion that it left a clear seal in human history and the cradle of an important civilization like the Latin American, though nowadays it cannot be cosidered the capital of Iberoamericanism since it has a counterpartner in North America and that's Mexico city; btw another one that should be added to the list as the most important city of the Aztecs and afterwards of colonnial spanish-Americas.

An interesting observation. Madrid was certainly an imperial city of the Spanish Empire.

But one should add for completeness that the Spanish Hapsburgs, like all Hapsburgs (as well as most of the European courts at the time) were a peripatetic bunch: they loved to move around depending on the time of year, and it is more precise to say that Madrid was the Winter capital of the Spanish Empire.

For the late Hapsburgs and the early Spanish Bourbons, the circuit was codified to 4 places: Aranjuez in Spring, La Granja is Summer, the Escorial in Fall, and Madrid in Winter. :)

London because it is the most important to my country's history (albeit a boring histoy)

You are right TPE also we should add that thanks to that bunch and their ultraspending policy, they drove Spain to bankruptcy in the 17th century; maybe if they didn't take such economics polices and also applied the Merchantilistic took by the French, Dutch and of course British maybe the history of the Spaniards would have quite different.

You are right TPE also we should add that thanks to that bunch and their ultraspending policy, they drove Spain to bankruptcy in the 17th century; maybe if they didn't take such economics polices and also applied the Merchantilistic took by the French, Dutch and of course British maybe the history of the Spaniards would have quite different.

I do wish there were more threads that add to the historic dimension. Write-ups like yours are just what we need in the other threads to add interest...

Thanks!

London because it is the most important to my country's history (albeit a boring histoy)

I don't think your history is boring at all. I'm sure you said that in jest! :)

Honestly - you guys are like a bunch of kiddies arguing. And London does have history!!!!

Perhaps you should start the poll again - but listen to what people have to say. Nominate first the cities that should be in the poll before it begins - probably about 5 or so and then choose the most popular from the nominations.

My nominations for most historic cities would go to - and in no particular order:

Rome
Athens
Mexico City
Damascus
Jerusalem
London - 2000 years of history is a lot.

If London is on there, then Paris has to be on there too.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Empire


http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/f/f2/British_Empire_Anachronous_2.PNG/800px-British_Empire_Anachronous_2.PNG

My vote goes to Amsterdam! :) Take a look at the Dutch 'empire'. And don't forget to check New York on the map, it was Dutch ones (and formerly known as New Amsterdam).

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/2a/NetherlandsEmpire.png/800px-NetherlandsEmpire.png

Indonesia, Sri Lanka, the Netherlands Antilles, Tobago, Suriname, Guyana , Belgium, Luxembourg, South Africa, parts of Malaysia, a part of eastern Brazil, New York City - New York, Albany - New York, Deshima, Corandèl (New Zealand), Smeerenburg (on Svalbard), Elmina (Ghana).

Pretty nice for such a small country :)

On topic: my vote goes to Rome because it's one of the oldest cities in the world.

I was considering beetwen Istanbul and Rome. But I voted for Istanbul, it has more dramatic storyline.

any city in asia...much more history than most of the ones mentioned here...not so much history in london or istanbul...xian maybe

Rome among others! :D

London gets my vote for being such a wonderful city and with a unque history from 1000s of years ago!

ROME