Was Constantinople more impressive than Rome?

🔴 YOU WANT TO SUPPORT THIS CHANNEL? 🔴

In this video, we are going to pose the ultimate question of ancient cities: Which city was more impressive in its prime, Rome or Constantinople? The old Rome or the new Rome?

🤗 One-Time Donation?
- Bitcoin: bc1qv4lsfsplvfecrrgvmfclhga28we7mvh9563xdj
🔗 Share the video with anyone who might be interested (it helps a ton!)

Main sources for this video:
Studies on Constantinople by Cyril A. Mango:

Two Romes Rome and Constantinople in Late Antiquity by Lucy Grig, Gavin Kelly:

🎦 FILMING EQUIPMENT WE USE: 🎦

Disclosures: Some links in the description are affiliate links which means that if you purchase something by clicking on one of them, your host Sebastian will receive a small commission at no additional cost to you. In this way you will be supporting the channel to improve the video production quality at no extra cost to you.

#Maiorianus

[michaelfisher]

I love Rome. But my heart belongs to Constantinople. Not for any "which is most impressive" reason, simply because the story of Constantinople enthralls me. A peninsular city, supplied by land and sea, surrounded by its walls, the landward walls being the most amazing defenses devised by Roman engineers and successfully protecting the city for nearly a mellenium. The Hagia Sophia, the Hagia Eirene, the Sacred Palace, the Mese, the aqueduct of Valens. Yes, Rome was the mother city...but Constantinople carried on the heritage when the mother city was lost...for a thousand years. That...is impressive.

[marvelfannumber]

I prefer Constantinople, though mostly for reasons you didn't mention in the video:
-Constantinople had much more romantic geography than Rome. Rome is located around a few hills near a small river inside mainland Italy. Aside from the hills, the geography isn't very captivating. Whereas Constantinople is located on a hilly peninsula next to the Sea of Marmara and the Bosporus. This not only allowed for stunning views from the sea, but also for great seaside views from the various villas and palaces, many of which were intentionally placed to get the most awe inspiring views possible.

-Constantinople actually had a city plan. Rome had expanded organically and while some Emperors attempted to impose a bit of order to the city, even in the 5th Century Rome was a complete mess with no proper grid to speak of aside from a few select portions. Constantinople on the other hand was (re)built from scratch in the Hellenistic style, and had its grid planned meticulously, which surely made for a much prettier and more navigable city than Rome was.

I also don't think the fact that Rome was bigger in size is necessarily that important when talking about which was more impressive. The vast majority of the city would be insulae, which were usually poorly built squatters that a time travelling tourist would surely avoid anyway. Also, from a time-travellers perspective, Constantinople is objectively more interesting simply for the fact that we know so much less about it than Rome, and compared to Rome far less has survived intact.

[maximgwiazda]

My vote is for Konstantinoupolis! There's a reason why it was called "The City of the World's Desire"! :)

[marto]

for me its Constantinople. It gives me the vibe of hiden paradise hidden from the colaps of the ancient world and from the medieval era. its like these cities like from the tales like Shangri-la and El dorado.

[williampaz]

I served 20 years in the US Navy and I have visited both. Hands down I prefer Constantinople (I VERY rarely call it Istanbul). The landward defenses are amazing and the Hagia Sofia is breathtaking. I stood inside, as far as the they would let me (it’s was still a Mosque when I visited) and I could very well understand Emperor Justinian saying “Solomon, I have outdone thee!” The Moslem’s recently gave it back to the Greek Orthodox Church and they have been cleaning it up, uncovering the mosaics and frescoes. Not even the Sistine Chapel took my breath away like that, and I have not seen it since the Greek Orthodox Church began its restoration. The Markets of Constantinople are….overwhelming. You can purchase ANYTHING there. There is STILL Chinese Silk and Burmese Jade for sale - at least when I was there - which means the Silk Road still operates! I bought a woolen prayer rug I kneel on when I say my nightly prayers (I am a Christian).
The breads, the meats and vegetables served over rice, the spices - The COFFEE! (Did you know that during the Ottoman Empire Turkish Women could legally divorce their husbands if they didn’t ensure they had enough Coffee?! No Joke). There is NOTHING like Turkish Coffee & hot Turkish bread with spiced butter in the morning. No, I have seen Rome as well as Venice and Constantinople has both of them beat hands down!

[BonanzaRoad]

Extremely interesting, well researched and fun. Both cities were no doubt fabulous to behold but my heart will always be with the old Imperial capital Roma, where it all began.

[isaacurquidi]

Constantinople may be a beauty, but her existence is owed to Rome.

[batugayretli]

Constantinople is way more romantic and beautiful city but Rome is where it all started and witnessed lots of great moments of history ❤
Upon his entrance to the Boukoleon Palace in Constantinople as a Roman and Classicism enthusiast Mehmet II quoted that:

The spider weaves the curtains
in the palace of the Caesars
The owl calls the watches
in the towers of Afrasiab.

Sad

[nikolaistavrogin]

Being a greek, Iam emotionally inclined towards Κωνσταντινουπολη. However I wish I could walk in ancient Rome during Marcus Aurelius era.

[pierluigipassoni]

I think Contantinople must have been amazing as a center of culture possibly more interesting than Rome at times. The libraries of Constantinople were Greek libraries containing many rare books that have not been preserved because of the 1204 siege and fire. Certainly Rome had important libraries but in its peak is hard to say whether Romans were interested in rare Greek works (they certainlyhad huge interest in the classical period of Rome). Constantinople for many centuries had extraordinary workshops which produced incomparable artistic treasures while it's difficult to say if that happened in Rome because often the Romans were importing from Greece statues and paintings.
Constantinople had been decorated with statues from ancient Greece in its beginning so also was hosting masterpieces...
But if we look at the number of statues recovered in Rome, they are so numerous that hardly any other city in the world could have a number even close to that. Hagia Sophia is an extraordinary building but the cupola of the Pantheon is much larger. Rome also had the so called Minerva Medica temple which is possibly the precursor of Hagia Sophia. The constantinian basilicas of Rome, St Peter, St Paul and the basilica of the Saviour (St John Lateran) with the baptisterium were perhaps not as interesting as Hagia Sophia but nevertheless wonderful and massive churches. It should be noted that Rome had an appendix in the port of Ostia and almost every rich Roman family had villas all around especially on the coastline.

[kaloarepo]

Cities near a large body of water tend to be a lot more interesting and impressive than inland cities even if on a river and the Tiber is quite a modest little stream.So I think Constantinople would have been more spectacular.One need only visit harbor cities like Sydney, Australia, Hong Kong or Rio de Janeiro to realize this.

[dashinvaine]

For some reason Constantinople fascinates me more, perhaps because it seems there is less left of it, so it is more of a mystery. The more picturesque geography and the spiritual allure of Eastern Orthodox Christianity also count in its favour. I've been to Rome twice, but haven't actually been to Istanbul. Ravenna is also very fascinating, and I'd like to go back to see Ravenna at before Charlemagne carried off all the best stuff.

[juancastillo]

I prefer Constantinople, yes it owes its history to Rome but its strategic location and powerful theodosian walls make it much more important than Old Rome.

[ibrahimsulaiman]

I've been asking myself this question for ages - thanks for doing the video!

Maybe another interesting factor would be longevity - how long each city was impressive for.
Rome was impressive and important for perhaps 600 - 700 years: from approximately 100 or 200 BC to 500 CE.

For Constantinople, the same figure would be roughly 900 years: from it's inauguration by Constantine until the Fourth Crusade.

Accordingly, Constantinople might have been smaller and less impressive, but it makes up for this by having centuries more lifetime.

[blushdog]

I love both cities but imo Romes quantity of pagan temples, their architecture and placement to each other is unmatched. The view of the roman forum from the bottom looking up at the hill with the temples while surrounded by the columns and pediments of the buildings in the foreground is so iconic and awe inspiring, it conjures up a similar aesthetic and feeling to that of the acropolis in Athens seeing the Parthenon and all the buildings on its hill. Constantinople's mix of byzantine and late roman architecture is beautiful but it feels a bit muted in contrast since there are less temples. I will say though the interior of the Hagia Sophia is unmatched and the hippodrome is one of my favorite buildings though I love the circus maximus in Rome too.

[edoardodipaolo]

Rome, then, now and forever. You can still feel the might of the Roman Empire while walking there. While Constantinople must have been beautiful, nothing could ever match the splendour and might of the eternal city.

[VanteTheOne]

Rome was a City of Marble, Constantinople was a City of Gold.

Both are magnificent in their own rights.

[curiousworld]

While both cities must have been amazing; I've long had a 'thing' for the Byzantine-era of the Roman Empire. Thank you, for a really interesting video and series. :)

[Feon]

Been waiting for this. Thanks Maroianus. Excellent video!!! My taste as regarding architecture leans towards medieval architecture so I would go with Constantinople although I must say ancient Rome looks amazing to. Really though call.

[deniz-gunay]

constantinople had the connection to anchient greece. it possesed many outstanding monuments, arts, books, and more. it was a mystical city that connects the world to anchient heritage and all its mystery. but all of her beauty was destroyed in 1204 when latins and crusaders sacked the city. for me, i always go with constantinople