过去和现在的低密度聚落轨迹:悖论和结果

Roland J. Fletcher
{"title":"过去和现在的低密度聚落轨迹:悖论和结果","authors":"Roland J. Fletcher","doi":"10.3389/fdigh.2019.00014","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The conventional history of urban growth defines agrarian-based cities prior to the 19th century CE as densely inhabited and commonly bounded by defenses such as walls. By contrast industrial-based cities are viewed as more spread out and without marked boundaries. Since the 1960s a trajectory towards extensive, low-density urbanism with sprawling, scattered suburbs surrounding a denser core has been formally recognised and given various names such as megalopolis in the West and desakota in southern and eastern Asia. These sprawling industrial cities have been regarded as a unique derivative of modern phenomena such as mechanized transport and the commercial property market. However, this set of premises are not valid. The agrarian-based world also contained dispersed, low-density urbanism - on its grandest scale, the vast circa 1000 sq km urban complex of Greater Angkor and the famous Maya cities of lowland Central America with maximum areas of about 200 sq km. The Maya only used pedestrian and riverine transport so the conventional transport explanation for industrial dispersed urbanism is at best partial. There was another trajectory to extensive, low-density settlement forms for places which were generally less than 15-20 sq km in extent but could on rare occasions reach areas as large as 40 to 90 sq km. Famous examples are Great Zimbabwe, Chaco Canyon and the European oppida of the late 1st millennium BCE. No-formally agreed term is available to refer to them. I will refer to them by default as “Giants”. The three trajectories to low-density settlement form redefine the history of settlement growth and the meanings of the term “urban”. Worryingly, none of the successive low-density settlements derive from any of the low-density cases of the preceding trajectory. Neither Angkor nor the Classic Maya cities have any connection to the industrial low-density cities. By contrast compact cities, the epitome of the obsolete definition of cities display continuity to succeeding urban forms over several thousand years. The implications for modern, giant, low-density cities are ominous.","PeriodicalId":227954,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers Digit. Humanit.","volume":"14 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-08-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"12","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Trajectories to Low-Density Settlements Past and Present: Paradox and Outcomes\",\"authors\":\"Roland J. Fletcher\",\"doi\":\"10.3389/fdigh.2019.00014\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The conventional history of urban growth defines agrarian-based cities prior to the 19th century CE as densely inhabited and commonly bounded by defenses such as walls. By contrast industrial-based cities are viewed as more spread out and without marked boundaries. Since the 1960s a trajectory towards extensive, low-density urbanism with sprawling, scattered suburbs surrounding a denser core has been formally recognised and given various names such as megalopolis in the West and desakota in southern and eastern Asia. These sprawling industrial cities have been regarded as a unique derivative of modern phenomena such as mechanized transport and the commercial property market. However, this set of premises are not valid. The agrarian-based world also contained dispersed, low-density urbanism - on its grandest scale, the vast circa 1000 sq km urban complex of Greater Angkor and the famous Maya cities of lowland Central America with maximum areas of about 200 sq km. The Maya only used pedestrian and riverine transport so the conventional transport explanation for industrial dispersed urbanism is at best partial. There was another trajectory to extensive, low-density settlement forms for places which were generally less than 15-20 sq km in extent but could on rare occasions reach areas as large as 40 to 90 sq km. Famous examples are Great Zimbabwe, Chaco Canyon and the European oppida of the late 1st millennium BCE. No-formally agreed term is available to refer to them. I will refer to them by default as “Giants”. The three trajectories to low-density settlement form redefine the history of settlement growth and the meanings of the term “urban”. Worryingly, none of the successive low-density settlements derive from any of the low-density cases of the preceding trajectory. Neither Angkor nor the Classic Maya cities have any connection to the industrial low-density cities. By contrast compact cities, the epitome of the obsolete definition of cities display continuity to succeeding urban forms over several thousand years. The implications for modern, giant, low-density cities are ominous.\",\"PeriodicalId\":227954,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Frontiers Digit. Humanit.\",\"volume\":\"14 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-08-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"12\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Frontiers Digit. Humanit.\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3389/fdigh.2019.00014\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers Digit. Humanit.","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/fdigh.2019.00014","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 12

摘要

传统的城市发展历史将19世纪之前的以农业为基础的城市定义为人口密集,通常由城墙等防御设施包围。相比之下,以工业为基础的城市被视为更加分散,没有明显的边界。自20世纪60年代以来,广泛的、低密度的城市化发展轨迹已经得到正式认可,并被赋予了各种名称,如西方的特大城市和南亚和东亚的沙漠地带。这些庞大的工业城市一直被视为机械化运输和商业房地产市场等现代现象的独特衍生品。然而,这组前提是无效的。以农业为基础的世界也包含了分散的、低密度的城市化——最大规模的是大约1000平方公里的大吴哥城市综合体,以及中美洲低地著名的玛雅城市,最大面积约为200平方公里。玛雅人只使用步行和河流运输,因此传统的运输解释工业分散的城市主义充其量是部分的。另一种发展轨迹是,在面积通常小于15-20平方公里,但在极少数情况下可以达到40 - 90平方公里的地方,形成广泛的、低密度的定居点形式。著名的例子是大津巴布韦、查科峡谷和公元前一世纪末的欧洲奥皮达。没有正式商定的术语来指代它们。在默认情况下,我将它们称为“巨人”。低密度聚落形态的三条轨迹重新定义了聚落成长的历史和“城市”一词的含义。令人担忧的是,没有一个连续的低密度定居点来自于前面轨迹的任何低密度案例。吴哥窟和古典玛雅城市都与工业低密度城市没有任何联系。与紧凑型城市相比,城市的过时定义的缩影显示出几千年来城市形式的连续性。这对现代、巨型、低密度城市的影响是不祥的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Trajectories to Low-Density Settlements Past and Present: Paradox and Outcomes
The conventional history of urban growth defines agrarian-based cities prior to the 19th century CE as densely inhabited and commonly bounded by defenses such as walls. By contrast industrial-based cities are viewed as more spread out and without marked boundaries. Since the 1960s a trajectory towards extensive, low-density urbanism with sprawling, scattered suburbs surrounding a denser core has been formally recognised and given various names such as megalopolis in the West and desakota in southern and eastern Asia. These sprawling industrial cities have been regarded as a unique derivative of modern phenomena such as mechanized transport and the commercial property market. However, this set of premises are not valid. The agrarian-based world also contained dispersed, low-density urbanism - on its grandest scale, the vast circa 1000 sq km urban complex of Greater Angkor and the famous Maya cities of lowland Central America with maximum areas of about 200 sq km. The Maya only used pedestrian and riverine transport so the conventional transport explanation for industrial dispersed urbanism is at best partial. There was another trajectory to extensive, low-density settlement forms for places which were generally less than 15-20 sq km in extent but could on rare occasions reach areas as large as 40 to 90 sq km. Famous examples are Great Zimbabwe, Chaco Canyon and the European oppida of the late 1st millennium BCE. No-formally agreed term is available to refer to them. I will refer to them by default as “Giants”. The three trajectories to low-density settlement form redefine the history of settlement growth and the meanings of the term “urban”. Worryingly, none of the successive low-density settlements derive from any of the low-density cases of the preceding trajectory. Neither Angkor nor the Classic Maya cities have any connection to the industrial low-density cities. By contrast compact cities, the epitome of the obsolete definition of cities display continuity to succeeding urban forms over several thousand years. The implications for modern, giant, low-density cities are ominous.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Ancient City, Universal Growth? Exploring Urban Expansion and Economic Development on Rome's Eastern Periphery A New Kind of Relevance for Archaeology Modeling the Rise of the City: Early Urban Networks in Southern Italy Trajectories to Low-Density Settlements Past and Present: Paradox and Outcomes Corrigendum: Large-Scale Urban Prototyping for Responsive Cities: A Conceptual Framework
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1