Ethnicity, Identity, and History by Joseph B. Maier

Author:Joseph B. Maier [Maier, Joseph B.]
Language: eng
Format: epub
Tags: Social Science, Minority Studies, Sociology, General
ISBN: 9781351318662
Google: 4Ks0DwAAQBAJ
Barnesnoble:
Publisher: Routledge
Published: 2017-09-08T02:47:40+00:00

10

Urban Development: From Urban Types to Urban Phases

Alvin Boskoff

Careful analysis of urban areas and their patterned activities effectively began about one hundred years ago, with Fustel de Coulanges (1955). But increasing urbanization and advances in scholarly resources and techniques have created a staggering and somewhat bewildering mass of relevant works. For convenience, these may be classified as: urban economic history (Bautier, 1971; Duby, 1974; Gras, 1922; Hodgett, 1972); urban demography (Hauser & Schnore, 1965; Herbert & Johnston, 1976); urban sociology (Boskoff, 1970; Mellor, 1977); urban archeology (Adams, 1966; Braidwood & Willey, 1962); the “new” urban (social) history (Abrams & Wrigley, 1978; Clark & Slack, 1976; Davis & Haller, 1973; Dyos, 1968); and most recently, urban anthropology (Eames and Goode, 1977; Fox, 1977; Gutkind, 1974; Friedl & Chrisman, 1975). Although varied objectives may be found in this academic avalanche, perhaps the underlying theme is a search for key aspects of urban dynamics, or more directly, an understanding of the causes and conditions of urban growth, development, and change.

In this multifaceted quest, perhaps two major strategies can be identified. One approach tries to derive a simplified causal factor or dimension from rich historical data for specific cities and for a limited time period — such as Fustel de Coulanges’ analysis of the declining role of religion in Athens and Rome (Fustel de Coulanges, 1955); Pirenne’s theory of the economic (commercial) base of urban revival following the Crusades (Pirenne, 1925); Childe’s technological theory of the “urban revolution” in Mesopotamia and Egypt (Childe, 1951). A significant variant of this approach, however, offers a more complex explanation of urban development — for example, R. Adams’ emphasis on technology, religion, and stratification in Mesopotamia and preconquest Mexican cities (Adams, 1966).

Despite the immense labor and detail in these studies, and their creative contributions to interpretation of urban experience, they share some common limitations. Methodologically, these “theories” or explanations are simply plausible assertions, bold and intuitive judgments, about the genesis of descriptive patterns (structure, growth, or long-term alteration). In the absence of adequate comparisons, or concern for relevant differences, these explanations rely on faith or logic, rather than demonstration. Indeed, given this basic deficiency, it is impossible to choose among conflicting theories of urban development (e.g., economic, technological, religious, political-organizational), or to determine the specific utility of any one theory for some range of cities or historical eras.

In short, these theories have been imposed on cavalierly selected portions of a conceptually chaotic urban “field.” Consequently, what was needed was a strategy (or strategies) for classifying or ordering this diversity so that appropriate comparisons might be devised, both for descriptive and explanatory purposes. Urban typology, therefore, became a serious and variegated phenomenon of urban analysis, from the 1930s to the present. The accompanying table contains a fairly representative listing of such classifications, testifying perhaps to the ingenuity and perseverance of urban scholars. I would like to review the basic character of this second strategy and also to suggest its probable achievements and also its theoretical shortcomings.

Download

Copyright Disclaimer:
This site does not store any files on its server. We only index and link to content provided by other sites. Please contact the content providers to delete copyright contents if any and email us, we'll remove relevant links or contents immediately.