Cities and towns were from there creation legal
entities with a spatial demarcation. So within a certain boundary the residents
of that area could enjoy certain rights or privileges. The right to fortify
this boundary -originally with a paling, earth bank, ditch or hedge- was one of
them. Other rights included private ownership of land, buildings and goods free
of tithe, trading rights, and the right to raise taxes and tolls. The creation
of cities and towns was often a strategic act by the one(s) that wanted to
better control or better exploit their holdings or area. Such cities often have
strategic positions on a trade route, at a river crossing, at a natural harbour
or as a staple town (e.g. salt in the case of Salzburg, Munich, Regensburg and
Lunenburg). Some cities occupy naturally high ground to be better defended
(Luxemburg City and Buda are excellent examples, but there are many more).
As the economic importance of towns and cities grew,
the settlements themselves grew and expanded, in some cases holding control
over the countryside around it (Groningen for instance), or in other cases
changing agricultural practices and land use around them (the market gardens
around English towns are an example of this). In some cases the city
authorities instigated land clearances for agriculture (very common in the Po
Valley, in the Low Countries, the Indus Valley and in China) or were active in
land reclamation (in Holland, Zealand, Friesland, Groningen, Flanders, Northern
Germany and the Veneto, to mention a few). The influence could also be
indirect: when a city was fortified an area was kept free of buildings to
better defend it. Later expansion of the Italian fortifications in the Dutch or
French style meant that large areas around a city were sacrificed for ramparts,
bulwarks and moats. In some cases additional hydrological measures were taken
to flood the area around a city as an extra defence (the improved Dutch system
of Menno van Coehoorn).
As a result the city was clearly defined in both a
spatial and a legal sense. This worked differently in areas where society was
basically run by a rich merchant class as opposed to a system of feudal
lordship. In the cities of the Hanseatic League, the Italian city states, the
German Imperial Free Cities and the cities of the Low Countries feudal law was
either non-applicable due to a freedom charter or the overlord depended so much
on the taxes taken that he was too weak to oppose the city’s rulers. In both
Dutch, Italian and German Free Cities the nobility that held the surrounding
lands saw themselves obliged to build residences within the city in order to be
closer to the real centre of power. The cities also attracted many tradesmen and
craftsmen. Often cities specialised in a few trades or products and adapted the
layout of the city accordingly.
In places with a strong feudal ruler, the cities were
often less specialised. The exception were the new towns created for specific
groups of immigrants where the local ruler provided space and rights to a
specific group with a specific skill or trade. Examples are Neu-Isenburg
Hanau-Neustadt and Erlangen, that were all founded by a count or duke to house
Huguenot immigrants and diversify the local economy. Feudal cities are
characterised by a stronghold or residence of the ruler. In some cities this
could be a Paltz (a royal residence for the traveling entourage and court of a
king), but in most cases it was the residence of the local ruler. It was
therefor important to be a residential city, if the ruler moved the main
residence most of the activity associated with it would also move away. The
effect is especially visible in Germany where many cities still have a large
castle or formal residence located on the edge of the old city. Only think of
the large residential palaces of the Bishops of Cologne (located in Bonn), Münster,
Mainz, Fulda, Würzburg and Bamberg, or the residences that dominate the centres
of Dresden, Bayreuth, Ansbach, Munich, Stuttgart, Darmstadt, Kassel, Hannover,
Gotha, Coburg, Weimar, Brunswick, Oldenburg, Karlsruhe, Schwerin, Cottbus,
Oranienbaum, Siegen and Vienna.
Although cities expanded, sometimes in quite a
large-scale way like Amsterdam, Munich and Berlin, most continental cities
remained bound by some type of demarcation separating them from the countryside
around them. Economic expansion -for instance new harbours- were built near the
existing city (Antwerp and again Amsterdam) and brought within a new expanded
demarcation or fortification, or were located at some distance (Delftshaven -literally
Delft Harbour- or Sluis north of Bruges) as a separate entity. This changed
with industrialisation.
Industrialisation was dependent on technical advances
to boost productivity and simplify production so unskilled workers were able to
do factory tasks instead of skilled artisans working together to produce
certain goods. A rationalisation of production started after the Middle Ages,
but remained relatively small-scale compared to the massive factories that were
built from the mid-18th century in England, later followed by
Belgium, Germany, France and the United States. Industrialisation was also
aided by good transport links (over water or by rail), the availably of labour
and the availability of raw materials. Industrialisation followed the path of
least resistance, and thus landed outside of established cities, or even in the
countryside if there was ample space (the zinc plants in the Campine), clean process
water available (textile industry of Twenthe), or raw material available
(mining and steel production in the Ruhr Area). If there was no local
population to fill the factories, these were brought in from further afield, or
even from other countries.
These workers also need housing and facilities,
especially near isolated production locations. In the Ruhr Area, Manchester,
Genk and Heerlen the various urbanised areas merged into an urban tapestry. The
railways, especially from 1850 onwards also lead to a rapid suburbanisation of
work and housing. The railways made it possible to commute from and to work and
live away from the factory or the office. The result was an outward explosion
of urbanisation. In England the villages around cities were overrun by new
residents and along new railway lines dedicated suburban housing was developed
(Metroland in London). This urban expansion was often unplanned (London and the
Ruhr Area), but sometimes efforts were made to streamline development. Planning
of suburban development starts in earnest around 1900 in the Netherlands and
Germany. Before that several people and reform groups propose new models of
housing (Model Dwellings Companies, Baugenossenschaften), alternatives for
unplanned growth (Camillo Sitte with his aesthetic theories and the suburban
satellite model central to the Garden City Movement), and an emphasis on living
conditions (Schreber Garten, Philanthropist Housing, Alms-houses and Courts Beguinage).
The result is an emphasis on allocation of functions,
housing being one, besides industry, retail commercial, water, waterways,
roads, railways, parks, recreation, civic use and so-on. In this tradition
infrastructure is planned in accordance with the projected use and necessary
changed are brought to the fore. In Germany the definition of city (Stadt)
changes from a place with city rights to a settlement of regional importance
with over 2.000 inhabitants. In England a city has to at least have 15.000
inhabitants to qualify. In the Netherlands, a place is only a city if it has
historic city rights or over 100.000 inhabitants. In Germany a city can become
a self-governing city (Kreisfreie Stadt) when it has over 100.000 inhabitents.
In some places cities have merged into large
conurbations; in other places there is a clear hierarchy of central and
peripheral places with the urban landscape. The city is now a functional
designation that can include areas with varying degrees of urban density; the
city has become an urban landscape!
No comments:
Post a Comment