Cities – Natural History
Many historians, architects and sociologists have studied cities in different dimensions. Giovanni Botero, for instance, has prophesized that cities grow to a point of greatness and power after which they stand at that stage or return back. His ideologies have been based on historical analysis of ancient cities of Egypt and Babylonia, Constantinople and medieval and modern cities such as Paris, London etc.
Sir William Petty on a similar study on observations on the growth of London sets an upper limit (500,000) for its population. David Hume has also accepted (based on the experience of past and present ages) such maximum limit beyond which he doubts the rise of proportion.
In the 19th Century, the need to address the rapid urbanization and the growing problems of the urban spaces had been recognized and accepted by many governmental organizations. A Royal Commission was set up by the British Parliament to study the public health conditions in cities and towns. Many American educationalists had also studied this phenomenon of urbanization extensively.
It has been observed that commercial civilizations grew in urban centres. There was marked destruction of scenic beauty and a lack of cultivation of art and learning. While New York proved to be an example of such a phenomenon, many cities such as Berlin, London, Paris etc. had been exceptions.
Thoughts of various authors:
Botero considered wealth and excessiveness to be an important feature of cities. Thus, the multitude and number of habitants not largeness determines the greatness of the city. He also adds that food supplies determine the nature and extent of the cities.
Tappan considers not only commerce but also manufacture and industry as significant factors of the growth of cities. He considered the cultivation of literature and science and the diffusion of knowledge important for sustenance of cities.
Weber through his comparison of rural and urban areas observed and noted higher death-rates in urban areas. The direction of development created a rural depopulation due to migration to cities and created dynamic civilizations there. He stated that the development of sub-urban towns was to correct any disbalance in the intensity of concentration. As a city expands to become a great city, the demand for the resident population as well as the crowding of administrative and commercial buildings increases. With increasing concentration of population, the city would be able to provide its citizens with the advantage of both the city and country life. The city region of rurban communities, green-belt areas etc. are examples of such regions.
However, Weber failed to make a distinction among the great cities (those with a population more than 100,000). Through his observation, he noted that big cities grew in no smaller rate than the small cities. But there was a point of saturation beyond which the power of attraction was weak.
Geddes through his observations on greater London gives an ethno-geographic viewpoint of civilization. He noted that London had an irregular growth pattern through which it engulfed the nearby town and created city-regions also known as conurbation.
An American economist, Gras has studied London as an economic metropolis. He states that the status of a metropolis of any city is based not on its size but on economic life. Many other researchers had studied the metropolitan character of cities in Europe.
Warren Thompson observed that the cities attracted business and people because of its prestige of bigness. He expected the population growth to slow down which would also reduce the rate of growth of cities. He insisted on the decentralisation of large cities. He set an upper limit for the cities at 1,000,000. With tremendous developments in transportation facilities such as internal-combustion engines, electric power etc., he believed the reality of the future would be based on poly-nucleated cities. Thus, he states that big cities cannot keep growing at past rates for our mechanical civilization to survive longer.
Life in cities/ Characters of cities
In a study by National Resources Committee of the United States, it was found that the same factors that produce the city and determine its growth is also responsible for its problems (both intra-urban and inter-urban) and destruction too. Large cities appear to grow rapidly than in small cities. Many significant changes in economic and social life have been a result of declining birth-rate in rural areas and ageing of the urban population. There is an emergence of new type of urban communities which is a characteristic of the metropolitan cities. Classification of cities has been made on the basis of its primary function such as industrial, commercial, residential etc. It was found out that big and small cities differed in their type of occupation. Also, larger cities were less favourable for self-employment.
Fawcett has discussed million-mark city which has twice the rate of growth in comparison to other cities in the same country. These metropolitan cities acquire the neighbourhoods in their periphery and become mother cities. Organic decentralization is one problem of contemporary town-building.
Urban sociologists and civic designers have raised concerns about the optimum size of a city. Professor Fleure has recommended a three-lakh-mark whereas Professor Clark suggests a population between 100,000 and 200,000. Manufacturing industries have been recommended to contain a population of 200,000 and 500,000. One common classification of cities based on size is 1. One-lakh-cities (Great Cities), 2. Three-lakh-cities (Super Cities), and 3. Million-mark-cities (metropolitans).
Reactions to address the problems of crowding in cities is the development of garden cities, poly-nucleated smaller cities etc. However, metropolitan cities become the chief centres of development as countries grow.
In 1890, 125 cities across the world had a population between 100,000 and 300,000. In 1960, this number had increased to 414. USA and USSR made significant contributions to these figures. In 1890, the urban population that lived in these great cities vary between 1 (India and Japan) to 10 (Britain) per cent. USA and Germany had approximately 6% while Italy and Spain had 4% of the total population residing in the big cities.
Almost every decade between 1930 and 1960 witnessed a two-fold increase in population as well as an almost doubling of the number of super cities. This increases in urban population in the 19th Century is to be attributed not only to the competitive endeavour but also to the communal efforts such as town-planning.
Countries could be classified as uni-metropolite, bi-metropolite or poly-metropolite depending on the number of metropolitan cities it houses. India has seven metropolitan cities against six and fice of Japan and USA respectively. But just the number of metropolitan cities does not give an accurate account of the urban population of the country. For example, Japan in its six metropolitans holds 17.9 per cent of its total population in urban areas. The same amount of population is housed in Egypt’s two metropolitan cities. Commonly, non-American cities tend to have a very high concentration of population.
Mark Jefferson has drawn attention to the law of the primate city. He holds that for a city to enlarge to a great extent, its centre must have existed for a long time. These civilizations multiply as the result and source of a cultural matrix. Modern societies generally tend to be poly-metropolite in nature.
It is paradoxical to note that at the end of the First World War when the risks to which the metropolitan population was open in the event of war, the number of metropolitan cities, as well as the number of countries with metropolitan cities, increased.
Also, in countries that had more than one metropolitan city, the largest city was at least twice as populous a the second largest. The demarcation of this huge order between the first and second city is found to be much more frequent than that between the second and third.
Cities as Capitals – India
Views of Toynbee:
Toynbee establishes a similarity of a certain degree of the historical and political geography between India and China. He uses this to study Cities and Civilizations. Firstly, he states the incidence of pressure to be a cause for the rise of the metropolis. Bombay in India and Shanghai in China are quoted as examples of this phenomena. Religious significance and the geographic locations of certain cities also prove to be useful.
Through his study on the Maurya and Gupta imperial periods, he has found the existence of metropolis and the same capital – Pataliputra. This city with a natural physical advantage of rivers and a prestigious long tradition had evidently been a good choice for capital.
He stated that the Bactrians who defeated the Mauryan Empire shifted their capital to Taxila. After their rein were several nomadic invasions. Then was established the Kushan empire with capital at Peshawar with geographical advantages of river Indus and Khyber Pass.
The last of the Gupta kings had located their capital at Sthanesvara, on the banks of Upper Jumna. India started to receive alien pressures from Arabs who had Kanauj as their capital for a certain period. He believes that this gave rise to the development of areas around them which became favourable to the birth and growth of Delhi. Though this city was built by Hindus, it was developed majorly by the Arabs. This way the city resembled Peking.
The Great Mughals had Delhi as their Capital expects for a few years when Agra was set as the capital city. Toynbee suggests laws of location and migration governing the decisions on capitals. The Eurasian and Iranic invaders of the later years also followed the same suit.
During the British rein in the 19th Century, the capital was shifted to Calcutta. This, according to Toynbee is synonyms to the shift of capital from Peking to Nanking during the Ming dynasty in the 14th Century.
H associates the growth of Bombay with maritime pressures. The concentration of vital elements of Hindu society and the housing of prominent politicians, industrialists and thinkers had made this ‘Gate of India’ a rising metropolis. The low military index of Bombay had left Delhi to win the status of the capital city of the nation-state of India.
Views of Cornish:
Cornish by paralleling the histories of Peking and China finds similarity in terms of physical aspects and differences in terms of political aspects between them. This can be explained because of the human elements and their reactions to the changing environment and traditions.
He also adopts a historical analysis of the growth of cities. The transfer of capital from Magadha to Pataliputra was not only because of its geographic features but also because of its connection with Aryan India, the Ganges Valley and the rest of the peninsula. Patna had remained the capital for a long time.
Meanwhile, the Ganges valley had become sacred to the Aryans due to the developments of religions of the Aryans viz Brahmanism, Buddhism. He adds that the region between Delhi and Patna was considered to be metropolitan under the Empire of Aryans. This was because of the existence of mythologically significant cities such as Hastinapura and Indraprastha in the proximity.
He has observed that in the 11th and 12th Century, the Turkish and Afghan rulers had their capitals based in the neighbourhood of Kabul. But in the next century, successful revolts at Delhi had enabled it to regain its power. It became possible to govern Afghanistan from Delhi. Later, on losing territories in the north-west, the Mughals had made Agra their capital for ease of administration.
A critic on the view of Toynbee and Cornish:
Toynbee has erred in the descriptions of the site of Pataliputra. He has also considered the Mauryan and Gupta period and has completely ignored the rest. His claims on Agra and Lahore being capitals for a few decades has no strong historical evidence to be backed up. In addition, Calcutta, a city that has been the capital for about a century was not given due importance in the analysis.
The status Magadha which he claims had been interior is also doubtful given the history of the region. Toynbee has held that language can be considered one of the primary components of the growth of cities. He had explained this argument of his through the example of the role of Sanskrit in Indic Civilizations. He has mentioned the epics of Mahabharata and Ramayana, the prestige and communicatory value associated with the language, contributions of the grammarian Patanjali, the literary and artistic values etc to prove his ideas. Though the Sanskrit language had been preserved by civilization, by the time metropolises began to develop, the language became a classical one with limited spontaneous usage.
Both Toynbee, as well as Cornish, have missed a few important historical records in the study of cities and civilizations. Hastinapur and Indraprastha, two cities that had a significant place in the Hindu dynasties, had been left out of the study. The purpose of referring to these ancient cities is to bring in notice the physical proximity of them to the country’s capital – Delhi.
The development of metropolitan capitals – historical analysis:
Delhi, along with the advantage of developments of regions around it throughout history, also was patronized by Muslim rulers. Calcutta, being a convenient port and a suitable region for industry, trade and commerce, was developed by the British. The opening of the Suez Canal provided ground for the development of Bombay due to enormous improvements in transportation facilities.
Cities as metropolises:
Metropolitan cities are not just big cities that act as the mother of the surrounding regions but also have an aura that influences the choice of people. Along with the size of the city, its function also has significance. It can be observed that cities that were capitals or capitals that have been superseded usually develop into a modern metropolis. Memphis of Egypt and Rome are the best example of this phenomena. Countries such as France, Great Britain, USSR also have to evidence this.
Moscow had been a metropolitan longer than London or Paris. This city which houses communists from around the world has been a ride for the Russians from the early 12th Century. Paris was considered the queen of Europe because of her educational facilities and artistic attractions such as the Cathedral of Notre Dame, Museum of Louvre etc. London could be considered in of the earliest modern metropolises because of its economic and commercial as well as numerical points of view.
Tappan holds that for a city to become a flourishing metropolis, it must have institutions that promotes art and learning as well as places of culture. He contrasts New York with London for its lack of cultural atmosphere. London had a unique feature that was favourable for the making and unmaking of Kings. This is proved true with the smaller proportion of the population in inner London and a larger population in Greater London.
It can be observed that contemporary capitals are undoubtedly the supreme metropolises of the countries. Even in the past, the metropolitans have had administrative and cultural power. This has been evident in the Indian, Chinese and Roman civilization amongst others. Babylonian civilization falls into the doubtful category because of its sheer physical size that would have been capable to hold more than a million population.
Memphis on the other hand due to its religious importance has attracted numberless pilgrims. Rome too was such kind of a city that attracted a huge influx of migrants due to its cultural and religious significance. The ancient Rome being an agricultural centre, also became a favourable ground for the development of industries as well as international trade. Thus, it came into contact with major commercial centres around the world.
A metropolitan should also act as a specimen of the people of national civilization i.e. it must consist of a fairly representative sample of the whole sider society. Memphis and Alexandria were examples of this phenomenon. Cities might also continue to represent the effects of past civilizations. For example, Baghdad showed signs that resembled the lineal descendants of Babylon.
Many cities have been developed from being religious centres. For instance, Bagdad and Rome were to cities that had given importance to the building of mosques and churches respectively. Cultural-intellectual institutions and activities play a major role in the formation of metropolises. Bombay, for example, has said to have attained a major part of its development because of the extent of work of media and press.
