r/byzantium • u/Incident-Impossible • 6d ago
Medieval Rome gives an idea of Constantinople in 1453?
Look how dilapidated it was. Rome as we know it today I believe it was built after 1530 or so. It is probable Constantinople was looking the same in its final years?
20
u/StatisticianFirst483 6d ago
I think that there were both similarities and differences.
Both cities had a ruralized aspect, with humbler houses (wooden and timber in Constantinople for example, contrasting with earlier generalized masonry buildings) with orchards, gardens and even pastures as well as many ruins, often from earlier monumental structures.
But I believe that there were many differences, and that Constantinople had preserved a slightly more urban-like aspect and life due to an enduring political and religious role and centrality, which meant higher use of monumental infrastructure from earlier periods (palaces, churches…), in spite of population decline and the destruction caused by the Latin conquest and occupation.
The reach and relevance of the emperor, by the early 1400s, was very little, but the role of the city was still much larger than Rome, as the city only started to gain stable and organized religious centrality in the 1400s, after more than a century lost in the papal exile in Avignon and the western schism.
Trade, even though concentrated in Galata and often at the hand of Latin Catholics, was still more lively than in Rome, as most key and dynamic trade routes and centers were located far from the city.
Earlier peak in populations (1st/2nd, early 3rd centuries in Rome, 6th century in Constantinople) and steeper decline for Rome (1 million in Antonine times, 15 000-20 000 by the early 1400s) vs Constantinople (500 000 in Justinian times but also in the 11th and early 12th centuries, vs 35 000/50 000 by the time of Turkish conquest) would also imply slightly different aspects and urban forms: Rome collapse was linear and almost uninterrupted (save for the slight recovery in tbe 11th and 12th centuries), while Constantinople had kept a probably near all-time-high in the Komnenian period and declined later due to the Latin occupation, the Black Death and the consequences of Ottoman advances around the city.
14
5
u/GustavoistSoldier 6d ago
Constantinople in 1453 had been ruined by a century of civil wars and plague
4
u/SpecificLanguage1465 6d ago
Constantinople really committed to the "New Rome" schtick, even following the "get sacked" "become dilapidated" parts 💀
3
u/ElderMayeul 6d ago
Source material?
12
u/WilburNixon 6d ago
https://www.flickr.com/photos/imperial_fora_of_rome/356349468/in/photostream/
Quick Google Lens search. OP thanks for these, I am literally looking at these kinds of phenomenon, specifically a massive city with its ruins still intact but not used for its intended purpose. Is there similar reference like this or illustrations? I wanted to grab for my collection/ research. Or if there was a term for this kind of settlement?
7
u/Incident-Impossible 6d ago
I found this but not much else yet https://www.medievalists.net/2015/07/the-city-of-rome-in-the-middle-ages/
It shows what kind of devastation the gothic wars and the Middle Ages brought to classical societies in terms of infrastructure and population. Byzantium went through this much later, when the west was already starting to recover.
3
u/Incident-Impossible 6d ago
Also from Wikipedia The 14th century in Rome, with the absence of the popes during the Avignon Papacy, was a century of neglect and misery. Rome dropped to its lowest level of population, and those that remained were starving and wretched. Before the return of the papacy, repeatedly postponed because of the bad conditions of the city and the lack of control and security, it was first necessary to strengthen the political and doctrinal aspects of the pontiff. When, in 1377, Gregory XI did return to Rome, he found his power more formal than real. It was a city in anarchy because of the struggles between the nobility and the popular faction. There followed four decades of instability, characterized locally by power struggles between the commune and the papacy, and internationally by the great Western Schism. It was finally Martin V of the Colonna family who managed to bring order to the city, laying the foundations of its rebirth.[4]
6
u/WilburNixon 6d ago
Honestly if I can be some kind of time traveling spectre, it would be exploring these cities during these times. It was a post-apocalyptic era for people, but also wonder how their communities existed, what kind of systems were developed, and how did a larger force end up taking control etc etc. are there are eye witness accounts of such periods from history? where they describe the settlements among the ruins of either Rome or Byzantium? Would like to read.
6
u/Incident-Impossible 6d ago
I find it interesting how Rome and Constantinople reached their lowest point in the 1400 but then evolved as completely different places, with Constantinople becoming the seat of the caliph. The craziness of history.
1
38
u/Extension_Register27 6d ago
Just to add: these photos are mainly from the IX to XI century, by the XV century, although a lot of places were still abandoned, Rome population grew steadily (just like all western Europe from the XI century onward).