This article describes a new model for urban planning in ancient and preindustrial cities that moves beyond the traditional simplistic dichotomy of planned versus organic cities. The model has two components: coordination of buildings and spaces, and standardization among cities. A variety of coordinated arrangements of buildings reflect urban planning, including simple coordination, formality and monumentality, orthogonal layouts, other forms of geometric order, and access and visibility (view-shed). Standardization among cities is analyzed in terms of architectural inventories, spatial patterns, orientation, and metrology. The political and social significance of ancient urban planning is then discussed using Amos Rapoport's model of levels of meaning in the built environment.
Amos Rapoport, “Levels of Meaning in the Built Environment,” in Cross-Cultural Perspectives in Non Verbal Communication, ed. Fernando Poyatos (Toronto: C. J. Hogrefe, 1988), 317-336; and Amos Rapoport, The Meaning of the Built Environment: A Nonverbal Communication Approach, rev. ed. (Tucson: University of Arizona Press, 1990).
2.
Bruce G. Trigger, Understanding Early Civilizations: A Comparative Study (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2003), 28-39, reviews this concept, its justification, and the nature of scholarly documentation.
3.
Richard G. Fox, Urban Anthropology: Cities in Their Cultural Settings (Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice Hall, 1977); and Joyce Marcus, “On the Nature of the Mesoamerican City,” in Prehistoric Settlement Patterns: Essays in Honor of Gordon R. Willey, ed. Evon Z. Vogt and Richard M. Leventhal (Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press, 1983), 195-242.
4.
Louis Wirth, “Urbanism as a Way of Life,”American Journal of Sociology44 (1938): 1-24.
5.
For example, see Harold Carter, An Introduction to Urban Historical Geography (Baltimore: Arnold, Edward, 1983), 10-10; A. E. J. Morris, History of Urban Form: Before the Industrial Revolution, 3rd ed. (New York: Longman, 1994), 8-10; Jorge E. Hardoy, Pre-Columbian Cities (New York: Walker, 1973), 523-25; E. J. Owens, The City in the Greek and Roman World (New York: Routledge, 1991), 1-30; Ferdinando Castagnoli, Orthogonal Town Planning in Antiquity (Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 1971); Marc Van De Mieroop, The Ancient Mesopotamian City (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1999), 83-94; and Dora P. Crouch and June G. Johnson, Tradition in Architecture: Africa, America, Asia, and Oceania (New York: Oxford University Press, 2001), 210-13.
6.
Carter, An Introduction to Urban Historical Geography, 10-10.
7.
Adam T. Smith, The Political Landscape: Constellations of Authority in Early Complex Polities (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2003), 225-226.
8.
Smith, The Political Landscape, 226-226.
9.
Keith D. Lilley, Urban Life in the Middle Ages, 1000-1450 (New York: Palgrave, 2002).
10.
Spiro Kostof, The City Shaped: Urban Patterns and Meanings through History (Boston: Bullfinch, 1991); and Spiro Kostof, The City Assembled: The Elements of Urban Form through History (Boston: Bullfinch, 1992).
11.
Kostof, The City Shaped, 95-157.
12.
Bruce G. Trigger, “Monumental Architecture: A Thermodynamic Explanation of Behavior,”World Archaeology22 (1990): 119-132; Jerry D. Moore, Architecture and Power in the Ancient Andes: The Archaeology of Public Buildings (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1996); and Joyce Marcus, “Monumentality in Archaic States: Lessons Learned from Large-Scale Excavations of the Past,” in Theory and Practice in Mediterranean Archaeology: Old World and New World Perspectives, ed. John K. Papadopoulos and Richard M. Leventhal (Los Angeles: Cotsen Institute of Archaeology, University of California, Los Angeles, 2003), 115-34.
13.
Nigel Taylor, Urban Planning Theory since 1845 (London: Sage, 1998); Peter Hall, Cities of Tomorrow: An Intellectual History of Planning and Design in the Twentieth Century, rev. ed. (Cambridge: Blackwell, 1996); and Thomas Hall, Planning Europe's Capital Cities: Aspects of Nineteenth Century Urban Development (London: Spon, 1997).
14.
Trigger, Understanding Early Civilizations; Smith, The Political Landscape; and Gary M. Feinman and Joyce Marcus, eds., Archaic States (Santa Fe, NM: School of American Research Press, 1998).
15.
Wendy Ashmore, “Construction and Cosmology: Politics and Ideology in Lowland Maya Settlement Patterns,” in Word and Image in Maya Culture: Explorations in Language, Writing, and Representation, ed. William F. Hanks and Don S. Rice (Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press, 1989), 272-286, 272-272. Ashmore uses the phrase “site planning” as a synonym for city planning. She is not referring to what modern planners call site planning; see Kevin Lynch, Site Planning (Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 1962). It could be argued that her phrase confuses the archaeological remains surviving today and studied by archaeologists (i.e., archaeological sites) with the dynamic ancient urban settlements whose characteristics archaeologists try to reconstruct from archaeological sites (i.e., cities and towns). For another definition of ancient planning based on intentions, see Martin Biddle, “The Evolution of Towns: Planned Towns before 1066,” in The Plans and Topography of Medieval Towns in England and Wales, ed. M. W. Barley, Research Report no. 14 (London: Council for British Archaeology, 1976), 19-32.
16.
Simon P. Ellis, “Prologue to a Study of Roman Urban Form,” in Theoretical Roman Archaeology: Second Conference Proceedings, ed. Peter Rush, vol. 14, Worldwide Archaeology Series (Brookfield, Vt.: Avebury, 1995), 92-104, 93-93.
17.
Peter Lacovara, The New Kingdom Royal City (London: Kegal Paul, 1997), 1-1, 76-80.
18.
Nancy S. Steinhardt, Chinese Imperial City Planning (Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 1990); and Castagnoli, Orthogonal Town Planning in Antiquity.
19.
Carter, An Introduction to Urban Historical Geography, 8-8.
20.
Robert L. Scranton, “Group Design in Greek Architecture,”Art Bulletin31 (1949): 247-268, 248-248.
21.
Anthony F. Aveni and Horst Hartung, Maya City Planning and the Calendar, American Philosophical Society, Transactions, vol. 76, pt. 7 (Philadelphia: American Philosophical Society, 1987).
22.
Edmund N. Bacon, The Design of Cities (New York: Viking, 1967), 68-69.
23.
Steinhardt, Chinese Imperial City Planning, 150-154.
24.
Joshua C. Taylor, Learning to Look: A Handbook for the Visual Arts, 2nd ed. (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1981), 65-68, 95-95.
25.
Steinhardt, Chinese Imperial City Planning, 5-12.
26.
Barbara L. Stark, “Formal Architectural Complexes in South-central Veracruz, Mexico: A Capital Zone?”Journal of Field Archaeology26 (1999): 197-226, 205-205.
27.
Kevin Lynch, The Image of the City (Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 1960).
28.
See R. Barry Lewis, Charles Stout, and Cameron B. Wesson, “The Design of Mississippian Towns,” in Mississippian Towns and Sacred Spaces: Searching for an Architectural Grammar, ed. R. Barry Lewis and Charles Stout (Tuscaloosa: University of Alabama Press, 1998), 1-21. It is often argued that urban settlements are only found in states, not chiefdoms, and thus Mississippian towns should be eliminated from considerations of urbanism; for example, Paul D. Welch, “How Early Were Cities in the Eastern United States?” Journal of Urban History 30 (2004): 594-604. The functional approach to urbanism followed here, however, admits Cahokia and other Mississippian sites as fully urban settlements based on the administrative and religious urban functions based in their central towns. On Mississippian towns, see Timothy R. Pauketat, Ancient Cahokia and the Mississippians, Case Studies in Early Societies (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2004); Lewis, Stout, and Wesson, “The Design of Mississippian Towns”; and William R. Swagerty, “Urban Indians before Columbus” (review essay), Journal of Urban History 26 (2000): 493-507.
29.
Trigger, “Monumental Architecture.”
30.
Jacques Dumarçay and Pascal Royère, Cambodian Architecture, Eighth to Thirteenth Centuries, Handbook of Oriental Studies, sec. 3, Southeast Asia, vol. 12 (Leiden: Brill, 2001).
31.
Castagnoli, Orthogonal Town Planning in Antiquity; and Kostof, The City Shaped.
32.
Kent V. Flannery, “The Origins of the Village as a Settlement Type in Mesoamerica and the Near East: A Comparative Study,” in Man, Settlement, and Urbanism, ed. Peter J. Ucko, Ruth Tringham, and G. W. Dimbleby (Cambridge: Schenkman, 1972), 23-53.
33.
Others have argued that the residential neighborhoods of Mohenjo-Daro do indeed exhibit true orthogonal planning, with the successive use of different alignments; see Michael R. N. Jansen, “Mohenjo-Daro: Type Site of the Earliest Urbanization Process in South Asia,” in Urban Form and Meaning in South Asia: The Shaping of Cities from Prehistoric to Precolonial Times, ed. Howard Spodek and Doris Meth Srinivasan, vol. 31, Studies in the History of Art, Center for Advanced Study in the Visual Arts, Symposium Papers XV (Washington, D.C.: National Gallery of Art, 1993), 35-51. Mohenjo-Daro and other Harappan cities clearly exhibit various types of nonorthogonal planning, and several overall features of these cities (e.g., the citadel and major avenues) are laid out orthogonally; see Jonathan Mark Kenoyer, Ancient Cities of the Indus Valley Civilization (Karachi, Pakistan: Oxford University Press, 1998). Nevertheless, the residential neighborhoods seem to fit better in the category of semiorthogonal urban blocks.
34.
Leonard Woolley and P. R. S. Moorey, Ur “of the Chaldees”: A Revised and Updated Edition of Sir Leonard Woolley's Excavations at Ur, rev. ed. (Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press, 1982).
35.
Barry J. Kemp, “Bricks and Metaphor. In: Viewpoint: Were Cities Built as Images?”Cambridge Archaeological Journal10 (2000): 335-346.
36.
B. Erickson and T. Lloyd-Jones, “Experiments with Settlement Aggregation Models,”Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design24 (1997): 903-928.
37.
David O'Connor, “The City and the World: Worldview and Built Forms in the Reign of Amenhotep III,” in Amenhotep III: Perspectives on His Reign, ed. David O'Connor and Eric H. Cline (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1998), 125-172; and David O'Connor, City and Cosmos in Ancient Egypt: The New Kingdom Evidence (London: Athlone, 2006).
38.
René Millon, Text, pt. 1 of The Teotihuacan Map, vol. 1 of Urbanization at Teotihuacan, Mexico (Austin: University of Texas Press, 1973).
39.
Roland Fletcher, “Seeing Angkor: New Views of an Old City,”Journal of the Oriental Society of Australia32-33 (2000-2001): 1-27.
40.
Castagnoli, Orthogonal Town Planning in Antiquity; and Bryan Ward-Perkins, Cities of Ancient Greece and Italy: Planning in Classical Antiquity (New York: Braziller, 1974).
41.
Sibyl Moholy-Nagy, Matrix of Man: An Illustrated History of Urban Environment (New York: Praeger, 1968) 18-18.
42.
Castagnoli, Orthogonal Town Planning in Antiquity, 95-122.
43.
Ibid., 56-93.
44.
Nicholas Cahill, Household and City Organization at Olynthus (New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 2001).
45.
Steinhardt, Chinese Imperial City Planning; Paul Wheatley, The Pivot of the Four Quarters: A Preliminary Enquiry into the Origins and the Character of the Ancient Chinese City (Chicago: Aldine, 1971); Spodek and Srinivasan, Urban Form and Meaning in South Asia; Dumarçay and Royère, Cambodian Architecture; and Fletcher, “Seeing Angkor.”
46.
Eric P. Uphill, Egyptian Towns and Cities, Shire Egyptology (Aylesbury, UK: Shire, 1988); Barry J. Kemp, Ancient Egypt: Anatomy of a Civilization (New York: Routledge, 1991); and Kemp, “Bricks and Metaphor.”
47.
Kemp, “Bricks and Metaphor.” See also Lacovara, The New Kingdom Royal City, 22-23.
48.
Van De Mieroop, The Ancient Mesopotamian City; and Charles Gates, Ancient Cities: The Archaeology of Urban Life in the Ancient Near East and Egypt, Greece, and Rome (New York: Routledge, 2003).
49.
Marc Van De Mieroop, “Reading Babylon,”American Journal of Archaeology107 (2003): 257-275.
50.
William H. Isbell and Gordon McEwan, eds., Huari Administrative Structures (Washington, D.C.: Dumbarton Oaks, 1991); John Hyslop, Inka Settlement Planning (Austin: University of Texas Press, 1990); and Graziano Gasparini, “The Pre-Hispanic Grid System: The Urban Shape of Conquest and Territorial Organization,” in Settlements in the Americas: Cross-Cultural Perspectives, ed. Ralph Bennett (Newark: University of Delaware Press, 1993), 78-109.
51.
Michael E. Smith, “The Archaeology of Aztec City-State Capitals: Four Views of Aztec Urbanism,” in El Urbanismo En Mesoamérica / Urbanism in Mesoamerica, ed. William T. Sanders and Robert H. Cobean, vol. 2, Proyecto Urbanismo En Mesoamérica / The Mesoamerican Urbanism Project (University Park and Mexico City: Pennsylvania State University and Instituto Nacional de Antropología e Historia, in press).
52.
Joseph Rykwert, The Idea of a Town: The Anthropology of Urban Form in Rome, Italy, and the Ancient World (Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 1988), 26-26.
53.
James C. Scott, Seeing like a State: How Certain Schemes to Improve the Human Condition Have Failed (New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 1998). See also Kostof, The City Shaped.
54.
Kostof, The City Shaped, 159-207.
55.
Kevin Lynch, A Theory of Good City Form (Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 1981), 373-389.
56.
Kostof, The City Shaped, 183-184; Nezar Al Sayyad, Cities and Caliphs: On the Genesis of Arab-Muslim Urbanism (Westport, Conn.: Greenwood, 1991); Stefano Bianca, Urban Form in the Arab World (New York: Thames and Hudson, 2000); and Norman J. Johnston, Cities in the Round(Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1983) 13-20.
57.
Phil C. Weigand, “The Evolution and Decline of a Core of Civilization: The Teuchitlán Tradition and the Archaeology of Jalisco,” in Greater Mesoamerica: The Archaeology of West and Northwest Mexico, ed. Michael S. Foster and Shirley Gorenstein (Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press, 2000), 43-58; and Phil C. Weigand, “The Architecture of the Teuchitlán Tradition in the Occidente of Mesoamerica,” Ancient Mesoamerica 7 (1996): 91-102.
58.
Yigal Shiloh, “Elements in the Development of Town Planning in the Israelite City,”Israel Exploration Journal28 (1978): 36-51; and Aharon Kempinski, “Fortifications, Public Buildings, and Town Planning in the Early Bronze Age,” in The Architecture of Ancient Israel: From Prehistoric to the Persiaon Periods, ed. Aharon Kempinski and R. Reich (Jerusalem: Israel Exploration Society, 1992), 68-84.
59.
Graham Connah, “African City Walls: A Neglected Source?” in Africa's Urban Past, ed. David M. Anderson and Richard Rathbone (Portsmouth, N.H.: Heinemann, 2000), 36-51; James D. Tracy, ed., City Walls: The Urban Enceinte in Global Perspective (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2001); and Horst de la Croix, Military Considerations in City Planning (New York: Braziller, 1972).
60.
Jerry D. Moore, “Pattern and Meaning in Prehistoric Peruvian Architecture: The Architecture of Social Control in the Chimu State,”Latin American Antiquity3 (1992): 95-113; Steinhardt, Chinese Imperial City Planning; and Michael E. Smith, The Aztecs, 2nd ed. (Oxford: Blackwell Publishers, 2003), 220-26.
61.
Clifford Geertz, Negara: The Theatre State in Nineteenth Century Bali (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1980), 109-120; and G. J. Afolabi Ojo, Yoruba Palaces: A Study of Afins of Yorubaland (London: University of London Press, 1966).
62.
Mark W. Lake and Patricia E. Woodman, “Visibility Studies in Archaeology: A Review and Case Study,”Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design30 (2003): 689-707; and Constantinos A. Doxiadis, Architectural Space in Ancient Greece, trans. Jaqueline Tyrwhitt (Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 1972).
63.
Kemp, Ancient Egypt, 205-217; Moore, Architecture and Power in the Ancient Andes, 153-64; William Cavanagh, “Empty Space? Courts and Squares in Mycenaean Towns,” in Urbanism in the Aegean Bronze Age, ed. Keith Branigan, vol. 4, Sheffield Studies in Aegean Archaeology (Sheffield, UK: Sheffield Academic, 2002), 119-34; and Takeshi Inomata, “The Classic Maya Palace as a Political Theater,” in Reconstruyendo La Ciudad Maya: El Urbanismo En Las Sociedades Antiguas, ed. Andrés Ciudad Ruiz, María Josefa Iglesias Ponce de León, and María del Carmen Martínez Martínez (Madrid: Sociedad Española de Estudios Mayas, 2001), 341-62.
64.
David Wheatley and Mark Gillings, “Vision, Perception and GIS: Developing Enriched Approaches to the Study of Archaeological Visibility,” in Beyond the Map: Archaeology and Spatial Technologies, ed. Gary R. Lock, Nato Science Series A: Life Sciences (Amsterdam: IOS Press, 2000), 1-27.
65.
Steinhardt, Chinese Imperial City Planning.
66.
Ciudad Ruiz, Iglesias Ponce de León, and Martínez Martínez, Reconstruyendo La Ciudad Maya; and George F. Andrews, Maya Cities: Placemaking and Urbanization (Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1975).
67.
Graziano Gasparini and Luise Margolies, Inca Architecture, trans. Patricia J. Lyon (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1980); and Hyslop, Inka Settlement Planning.
68.
Van De Mieroop, The Ancient Mesopotamian City, 63-84.
69.
Smith, “The Archaeology of Aztec City-State Capitals”; and Michael E. Smith, Aztec City-State Capitals, Ancient Cities of the New World series (Gainesville: University Press of Florida, in press).
70.
Eva Krapf-Askari, Yoruba Towns and Cities: An Enquiry into the Nature of Urban Social Phenomena (London: Oxford University Press, 1969); and Ojo, Yoruba Palaces.
71.
Cavanagh, “Empty Space?”; Dumarçay and Royère, Cambodian Architecture; Isbell and McEwan, Huari Administrative Structures; Hyslop, Inka Settlement Planning; Lewis, Stout, and Wesson, “The Design of Mississippian Towns”; Thomas H. Charlton, “The Influence and Legacy of Teotihuacan on Regional Routes and Urban Planning,” in Ancient Road Networds and Settlement Hierarchies in the New World, ed. Charles D. Trombold (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1991), 186-97; and Castagnoli, Orthogonal Town Planning in Antiquity.
72.
Wheatley, The Pivot of the Four Quarters, 423-442.
73.
Anthony F. Aveni, “Archaeoastronomy in the Ancient Americas,”Journal of Archaeological Research11 (2003): 149-191, 163-163. See also Aveni and Hartung, Maya City Planning and the Calendar.
74.
Gasparini, “The Pre-Hispanic Grid System”; and Aveni and Hartung, Maya City Planning and the Calendar.
75.
Eleanor Mannikka, Angkor Wat: Time, Space, and Kingship (Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 1996); and R. Bruce Drewitt, “Measurement Units and Building Axes at Teotihuacan,” in Teotihuacán: Nuevos Datos, Nuevas Síntesis, Nuevos Problemas, ed. Emily McClung de Tapia and Evelyn C. Rattray (Mexico City: Instituto de Investigaciones Antropológicas, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, 1987), 389-98.
76.
Saburo Sugiyama, “Worldview Materialized in Teotihuacan, Mexico,”Latin American Antiquity4 (1993): 103-129; and Mannikka, Angkor Wat.
77.
Michael E. Smith, “City Size in Late Postclassic Mesoamerica,”Journal of Urban History31 (2005): 403-434.
78.
Rapoport, “Levels of Meaning in the Built Environment”; and Rapoport, The Meaning of the Built Environment.
79.
Mircea Eliade, Cosmos and History: The Myth of the Eternal Return, trans. Willard R. Trask (New York: Harper & Row, 1959), 5-12.
80.
Wheatley, The Pivot of the Four Quarters.
81.
For example, John B. Carlson, “A Geomantic Model for the Interpretation of Mesoamerican Sites: An Essay in Cross-Cultural Comparison,” in Mesoamerican Sites and World-views, ed. Elizabeth P. Benson (Washington, D.C.: Dumbarton Oaks, 1981), 143-216; Davíd Carrasco, City of Sacrifice: The Aztec Empire and the Role of Violence in Civilization (Boston: Beacon, 1999); and Wheatley, The Pivot of the Four Quarters.
82.
Amos Rapoport, “On the Nature of Capitals and Their Physical Expression,” in Capital Cities, Les Capitales: Perspectives Internationales, International Perspectives, ed. John Taylor, Jean G. Lengellé, and Caroline Andrew (Ottawa, Ont.: Carleton University Press, 1993), 31-67, 43-52.
83.
Lynch, A Theory of Good City Form, 73-81.
84.
Ibid., 73.
85.
Ibid., 75-79.
86.
Ibid., 79.
87.
Arthur F. Wright, “The Cosmology of the Chinese City,” in The City in Late Imperial China, ed. G. William Skinner (Stanford, Calif.: Stanford University Press, 1977), 33-73; Steinhardt, Chinese Imperial City Planning; and Wheatley, The Pivot of the Four Quarters.
88.
Spodek and Srinivasan, Urban Form and Meaning in South Asia; John McKim Malville and Lalit M. Gurjal, eds., Ancient Cities, Sacred Skies: Cosmic Geometries and City Planning in Ancient India (New Delhi: Indira Gandhi National Centre for the Arts, 2000); and John M. Fritz, George Michell, and M. S. Negaraja Rao, Where Kings and Gods Meet: The Royal Center at Vijayanagara, India (Tucson: University of Arizona Press, 1984).
89.
Michael D. Coe, Angkor and the Khmer Civilization (New York: Thames and Hudson, 2003); Fletcher, “Seeing Angkor”; Dumarçay and Royère, Cambodian Architecture; and Mannikka, Angkor Wat.
90.
Carlson, “A Geomantic Model for the Interpretation of Mesoamerican Sites”; Carrasco, City of Sacrifice; Wheatley, The Pivot of the Four Quarters; and Rykwert, The Idea of a Town.
91.
Michael E. Smith, “Did the Maya Build Architectural Cosmograms?”Latin American Antiquity16 (2005): 217-224.
92.
Trigger, Understanding Early Civilizations.
93.
Roy A. Rappaport, Ritual and Religion in the Making of Humanity (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1999).
94.
Kent V. Flannery and Joyce Marcus, “Cognitive Archaeology,”Cambridge Archaeological Journal3 (1993): 260-270; and Kemp, “Bricks and Metaphor.”
95.
Bruce G. Trigger, “Cross-Cultural Comparison and Archaeological Theory,” in A Companion to Social Archaeology, ed. Robert W. Preucel and Lynn Meskell (Oxford: Blackwell, 2004), 43-65, 59-59; and Ian Hodder, ed., The Archaeology of Contextual Meanings (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1987).
96.
Ashmore, “Construction and Cosmology”; Wendy Ashmore and Jeremy A. Sabloff, “Spatial Orders in Maya Civic Plans,” Latin American Antiquity 13 (2002): 201-15; Michael E. Smith, “Can We Read Cosmology in Ancient Maya City Plans? Comment on Ashmore and Sabloff,” Latin American Antiquity 14 (2003): 221-28; and Smith, “Did the Maya Build Architectural Cosmograms?” For other examples of universalist interpretations of ancient planning based on the concepts of Eliade, see Jeffrey Soles, “The Functions of a Cosmological Center: Knossos in Palatial Crete,” in Politeia: Society and State in the Aegean Bronze Age, ed. Robert Laffineur and Wolf-Dietrich Niemeir, vol. 12, Aegaeum (Liège, Belgium: Université de Liège, 1995), 405-14; and the papers in Malville and Gurjal, Ancient Cities, Sacred Skies.
97.
Monica Barnes and Daniel Slive, “El Puma De Cuzco,”Revista Andina11, no. 1 (1993): 79-102.
98.
Niels Gutschow, “Bhaktapur: Sacred Patterns of a Living Urban Tradition,” in Spodek and Srinivasan, Urban Form and Meaning in South Asia, 163-183, 170-170.
99.
Several additional factors hinder the analysis of the high-level meanings of ancient cities. First, because modern cities have lost their high-level meanings, this is a foreign concept for modern authors; see Rapoport, “On the Nature of Capitals and Their Physical Expression.” As a result, one often finds one of two extreme (and contradictory) interpretations: dismissal of the concept of high-level meanings for cities or facile acceptance of the concept with little empirical evidence. Second, there is a long tradition of overstressing the role of religion in ancient societies. Popular accounts often suggest that ancient peoples were fundamentally different from modern peoples in their preoccupation with the gods or with death. For example, many popular authors have gone along with the exaggerated and ethnocentric observations of the ancient Greek author Herodotus, who said of the Egyptians, “They are religious to excess.” See discussion in Robert J. Wenke, Patterns in Prehistory: Humankind's First Three Million Years, 4th ed. (New York: Oxford University Press, 1999), 461-64. This view of the excessive religiosity of ancient peoples goes against the findings of comparative anthropology; see Trigger, Understanding Early Civilizations, 410-13. When applied to cities and urban planning, this biased view of ancient peoples translates into an exaggerated emphasis on the religious and symbolic aspects of city layout.
100.
Krapf-Askari, Yoruba Towns and Cities, 42-42.
101.
Trigger, “Monumental Architecture,”119-132.
102.
Richard E. Blanton, “Continuity and Change in Public Architecture: Periods I through V of the Valley of Oaxaca, Mexico,” in Monte Alban's Hinterland, Part II: Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Tlacolula, Etla, and Ocotlan, the Valley of Oaxaca, Mexico, ed. Stephen A. Kowalewski, Gary M. Feinman, Laura Finsten, Richard E. Blanton, and Linda M. Nicholas, vol. 23, Memoirs (Ann Arbor: Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, 1989), 409-447; Marcus, “Monumentality in Archaic States”; Trigger, “Monumental Architecture”; and Rapoport, “On the Nature of Capitals and Their Physical Expression.”
103.
Marcus, “Monumentality in Archaic States.”
104.
Mark Lehner, The Complete Pyramids: Solving the Ancient Mysteries (New York: Thames and Hudson, 1997), 224-225; and Trigger, Understanding Early Civilizations, 377-89.
105.
George L. Cowgill, “Teotihuacan: Cosmic Glories and Mundane Needs,” in The Social Construction of Ancient Cities, ed. Monica L. Smith (Washington, D.C.: Smithsonian Institution Press, 2003), 37-55, 44-44; John E. Clark, “Mesoamerica Goes Public: Early Ceremonial Centers, Leaders, and Communities,” in Mesoamerican Archaeology: Theory and Practice, ed. Julia A. Hendon and Rosemary Joyce (Oxford: Blackwell, 2004), 43-72, 61; Adam T. Smith, “Rendering the Political Aesthetic: Political Legitimacy in Urartian Representations of the Built Environment,” Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 19 (2000): 131-63, 138; Smith, The Political Landscape, 165; and Timothy R. Pauketat, “The Tragedy of the Commoners,” in Agency in Archaeology, ed. Marcia-Anne Dobres and John E. Robb (London: Routledge, 2000), 113-29.
106.
Rapoport, The Meaning of the Built Environment, 139-139.
107.
For example, Lynch, The Image of the City; Edward W. Soja, Postmetropolis: Critical Studies of Cities and Regions (Oxford: Blackwell, 2000); and Dolores Hayden, The Power of Place: Urban Landscapes as Public History (Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 1995).
108.
Diane C. Favro, The Urban Image of Augustan Rome (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1996); and William H. Isbell and Alexei Vranich, “Experiencing the Cities of Wari and Tiwanaku,” in Andean Archaeology, ed. Helaine Silverman (Oxford: Blackwell, 2004), 167-82.
109.
Moore, Architecture and Power in the Ancient Andes; Smith, The Political Landscape; and Bill Hillier and Julienne Hanson, The Social Logic of Space (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1984).
110.
Chad Gifford and Félix Acuto, “Space, Place and Inka Domination in Northwest Argentina,” in Experimental Archaeology: Replicating Past Objects, Behaviors, and Processes, ed. James R. Mathieu, vol. S1035, British Archaeological Reports, International Series (Oxford: Archaeopress, 2002), 95-110.
111.
Trigger, Understanding Early Civilizations, 71-91.
112.
Geertz, Negara.
113.
Takeshi Inomata and Lawrence S. Coben, eds., Archaeology of Performance: Theaters of Power and Community (Walnut Creek, Calif.: Altamira, 2006).
114.
Smith, The Aztecs, 183-191.
115.
For example, Rykwert, The Idea of a Town, 26-26; Soja, Postmetropolis, 62; and Malville and Gurjal, Ancient Cities, Sacred Skies.
116.
Dan Stanislawski, “The Origin and Spread of the Grid Pattern Town,”Geographical Review36 (1946): 105-120; Carter, An Introduction to Urban Historical Geography; and Kostof, The City Shaped.
117.
Michael E. Bonine, “The Morphogenesis of Iranian Cities,”Annals of the Association of American Geographers69 (1979): 208-224; Dora P. Crouch, Daniel J. Garr, and Axel I. Mundingo, Spanish City Planning in North America (Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 1982); and John R. Mullin, “The Reconstruction of Lisbon Following the Earthquake of 1755: A Study in Despotic Planning,” Planning Perspectives 7 (1992): 157-79.
118.
Davíd Carrasco, “City as Symbol in Aztec Thought: Some Clues from the Codex Mendoza,” in Carrasco, City of Sacrifice, 15-48; and Johanna Broda, David Carrasco, and Eduardo Matos Moctezuma, The Great Temple of Tenochtitlan: Center and Periphery in the Aztec World (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1987).
119.
Smith, “The Archaeology of Aztec City-State Capitals.”
120.
Edward E. Calnek, “Settlement Pattern and Chinampa Agriculture at Tenochtitlan,”American Antiquity37 (1972): 104-115.
121.
Elizabeth M. Brumfiel, “Huitzilopochtli's Conquest: Aztec Ideology in the Archaeological Record,”Cambridge Archaeological Journal8 (1998): 3-14.
122.
Emily Umberger, “Antiques, Revivals, and References to the Past in Aztec Art,”RES: Anthropology and Aesthetics13 (1987): 62-105; and Smith, “The Archaeology of Aztec City-State Capitals.”
123.
Carter, An Introduction to Urban Historical Geography, 10-12; and Kostof, The City Shaped, 46-51.
124.
Martin Carver, Arguments in Stone: Archaeological Research and the European Town in the First Millennium, Oxbow Monographs, vol. 29 (Oxford: Oxbow, 1994).
125.
Government heritage managers are typically more interested in an attractive restoration of a later architectural period than in the destruction of the later buildings to unearth the fragmentary earlier buildings below.
126.
Terence N. D'Altroy, The Incas (Oxford: Blackwell, 2002); Gasparini and Margolies, Inca Architecture; and Hyslop, Inka Settlement Planning.
127.
Smith, The Aztecs, 37-42; and Smith, “The Archaeology of Aztec City-State Capitals.”
128.
Wim P. Blockmans, “Reshaping Cities: The Staging of Political Transformation,”Journal of Urban History30 (2003): 7-20.
