Angkor is considered the greatest Southeast Asian city of all time.
However the city was mostly canals, farms and most people lived in huts.
They had great temples and palaces but does that make a city great?
>>2648172
You could say the same about Rome
>>2648172
>but does that make a city great?
Apparantly for southeasian standards it was a great city.
Place it in Africa and it would be a divine marvel; place it in europe or china and noone would give a shit-
>>2648184
Their cities were like modern cities desu
Size plus power. Power in this case can be a mix of physical, cultural, Spiritual, emotional ect.
>>2648243
Modern (western) cities aren't giant wooden fire hazards with shit infested streets
>>2648258
You're half right.
>>2648258
>>2648172
>huts
Not huts but rather stilted wooden buildings, its similar to east asian / Japanese cities actually, just tropical adapted
The only ruins you see left are the stone temples remains, because well, wood buildings don't survive, especially on tropical climate
Angor Wat is the coolest shit ever. There are like no fences or security guard and they are totally cool with letting people climb all over the temples and explore the hallways and shit. Fun day trip.
The only things that make a city great is its population and the technology of its time.
Having a huge population in one city isn't as impressive today as it was a thousand years ago because our modern technology has made running a major city much easier.
Today a great city is usually judged by its GPD
>>2648634
That's a temple retard
Would have looked like this.
>>2648645
Is it dangerous?