he origin of urban settlements appears to be closely linked to the development of agriculture. A study of the ruins of Stone-Age houses in the Near East has shown that many dwellings consisted of an open structure with no walls. The first permanent sites also date from this period. Perhaps the most obvious reason for creating sedentary settlements was the gradual realization that the life led by agricultural tribes was much easier than that of their nomadic counterparts. Other reasons that led to the establishment of this type of settlement were the need for special places (rather like shrines) in which to carry out rituals dedicated to the dead; for the creation of ceremonial centers for practicing religion and magic, and performing social activities; and, thirdly, for the improved security of the community.
By contrast, the essential activities of the earlier way of life were limited to hunting and maintaining the cohesion of the tribal
jj
group, so that the energy of its members was devoted primarily to survival. Although these nomadic tribes enjoyed occasional surpluses, preserving and transporting these surpluses required further expenditure of effort. It could therefore be argued that the accumulation of human energy released by the agricultural revolution was channeled into the development of urban settlements, which in turn gave rise to the sanctification of property rights and even the creation of aggressive war. Until the 18th century, the largest district in the world’s major towns and cities was in fact the administrative center of the governing power. Because there were no rapid means of communication, the mechanisms of government had to be brought together within the capital, while a large part of the army was camped nearby. Furthermore, much of the state’s business was conducted in the vicinity of these urban centers.
It was not until the industrial revolution and the development of the factory system that
the pressures of urban settlement began to take effect. Thousands of workers were needed for the huge, recently developed industrial buildings, while the establishment of a great many independent suppliers in these towns also contributed to their expansion. They often developed from what was originally an administrative center, or grew up around industrial settlements, which were often dirty and unsightly.
|
|
Soon, faster means of transport – due to the advent of modern motor vehicles – and the rising costs for urban companies, made this last type of town redundant as an industrial center. Today, new factories are rarely built within a town or city, and it is in fact quite common for companies to ask the relevant municipal authority for permission to build them outside the town or city boundary, so that they do not have to meet the high cost of urban land. This is why, from a purely economic point of view, the idea of replacing inner-city slums with modern factories is not at present feasible. It is possible to consider the mechanisms of urban growth on the basis of a central town theory, and its relationship to the size and distance between regional commercial centers. At the lowest level of the hierarchy are the towns supplying basic necessities to those regions isolated from the large urban settlements, and which are distributed throughout the surrounding area. The range of activity of these towns depends on the predominant means of transport. In this way, the towns increase in size as their surrounding regions expand and overlap with other regions from which they are technically distinct.
|
|
|
|
