Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Why did some places develop city states and others not so?
For example, Italy with Rome, some Etruscan cities, Greece, and nearby Lydia had city states. While Spain, Gaul, Dalmatia did not?
Sumer had city states, but Egypt did not. Persia also did not have city states and they formed an empire. China also did not have city states. They too developed into an empire.
After the dark ages, Italy once again formed into City states, while France, and Spain, and Germania did not. Kievan Rus started in Kiev, and eventuall Moscow became a city state that expanded and became Russia.
I think they key is location, as you don't have natural resources a city-state must thrive by being trading and mercantile centers - which means ocean ports and locations on common trade routes, and development of certain niche areas such as banking. It must also be defensible so they aren't swallowed up by nation-states and empires.
Sometimes cities become "city-states" via treaties and international agreements, sort of a "share the wealth" compromise.
Why did some places develop city states and others not so?
For example, Italy with Rome, some Etruscan cities, Greece, and nearby Lydia had city states. While Spain, Gaul, Dalmatia did not?
Sumer had city states, but Egypt did not. Persia also did not have city states and they formed an empire. China also did not have city states. They too developed into an empire.
After the dark ages, Italy once again formed into City states, while France, and Spain, and Germania did not. Kievan Rus started in Kiev, and eventuall Moscow became a city state that expanded and became Russia.
Why is that?
Many city states include area that are much larger than the city itself. Here's a map of Renaissance Italy and its "city states".
I think all empires started out as "city states", or as principalities that consisted of one city and the neighboring farmland and villages, something similar to Luxemburg. Then if one of these city states became powerful enough they would swallow up the surrounding city states forming a nation state/empire. Also it's possible if these city states were under some sort of threat, that hey could have formed alliances and over time merged into one nation state/empire. I think in some places this didn't occur as quickly such as Greece because of it's hilly terrain and irregular coast line, so it was probably harder for city states to invade each other, as opposed to china that developed on a huge flat flood plain. Also China used to consist of many smaller nations something on the scale of modern Europe.
Also, where did these city states draw from to fill out their armies and navies? Some of these city states were powerful enough to become empires like Rome, and Carthage.
Also in Greece, most of city states located in the south below Thebes. Why no city states in Epirus, Thessaly or Thrace?
Also, where did these city states draw from to fill out their armies and navies? Some of these city states were powerful enough to become empires like Rome, and Carthage.
Also in Greece, most of city states located in the south below Thebes. Why no city states in Epirus, Thessaly or Thrace?
If you have the commerce and coin you have the army - mercenaries/sell swords. Carthage for instance used mercenary troops from all over the med - Gauls, Greeks including Spartans, Libyans, Nubians.
To this day you have the city-state of Vatican secured by Swiss Guards.
A navy first and foremost is a matter of money and materials to construct ships, manning them is relatively easy.
I think of a "city-state" as a largely self-governing political center, or polis. An incipient republic, at the least. Athens, Republican Rome, Florence. Not Corinth, Carthage, the Etruscan cities, which were all straight "one-party" oligarchies. The Etruscan cities were unable to unite against the Romans, because they were self-interested cartels, more than "states". There is talk of "primitive democracy" in Sumeria, but I'm skeptical - more likely they were entirely under the thumbs of priests.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
