Roman cities that surprassed 500,000 inhabitants during Roman Golden Age (27 BC - 235 AD)>RomeIslamic cities that surprassed 500,000 inhabitants during Islamic Golden Age (750 - 1258)>Baghdad>Cairo>Córdoba>Kairouan>Fez>Samarkand>Gorgan>Palermo>Isfahan>Tehran>Aleppo>DamascusEtc etc etcThe difference between an statist, centralized and mercantilist empire that used its provinces as colonies made up to extract resources to supply Italy. And a liberal and federalist caliphate in which each emir appointed by the caliph is responsible for supplying his people within a meta-emirative economy network that merged distant trading routes and cultures.
Roman empire was an overrated shithole
Now do world population in those eras
>>18531778Source please
>>18531778>Saaarrr we wuz sultanz and shieett
>>18531778SSSSSSSSAAAAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRRRR, WE WUZ SULTANZ N SHIEEEET
wow they had more worthless brown biomass truly impressive
>>18531862U BLOODY BASTAR BICH, I WILL KILL UR MODAR AND RAPE YOU FADER, BLOODY BENCHOD BICH!
>>18531778the spanish empire was a more improved version of the roman empireunlike the romans the spanish did not center everything around one cityall places were of equal value
>>18531778It had nothing to do wit hthat. Rather it was because muslim BROWN BVLLS were more virile and heterosexual than whitecucks
>It had nothing to do wit hthat. Rather it was because muslim BROWN BVLLS were more virile and heterosexual than whitecucks
Inbred BRICStards on overdrive today lol
>>18531781and yet you live in a country influence by rome not your glorious sandniggers, how come?
>>18532065he wont tell you this, but the real reason is because every brown immigrant is a slimy hyena
>>18531778>And a liberal and federalist caliphateNice way to say weak and given lip service. The Caliphate had no control over Africa after the 9th century let alone any parts of Europe and developed into a rump state in Mesopotamia by the end of the 11th, under the control of Turkic overlords. The attribution of these cities being this large are mostly nonsense, there were no Levantine or North African cities with that many people living in it. You're just lying. Palmero at its peak might have had a 150k under the Normans. No Iranian or Central Asian city had that population either. Only Baghdad and Cordoba had such a population, temporarily at that. You also stretch out an arbitrary timeframe to try to include a 500 year period, why not do the same for the Romans? You could easily create a list of Roman cities over 100k inhabitants. This isn't even counting for the fact the total world population in the high middle ages was well over double that of Antiquity
>>18531778Want a pat on the back for taking over Greek and Persian cities, that then don't even have the same cultural output as 30,000-10,000 Western European cities?
gay op
>>18532654>that thenLatinxcrement ESLBabbling discarded
