РефератыИностранный языкWhWhen And Why Does The ancient City

When And Why Does The ancient City

When And Why Does The ?ancient City? Come To An End Essay, Research Paper


The Ancient City was more than a


cluster of classical buildings.? If we


were to define an Ancient City we would undoubtedly mention the public


buildings, the civic monuments, the theatres, the temples and the colonnaded


streets.? However the term Ancient City


has a deeper meaning.? In our definition


we must also state that the classical cities were run by the curiale classes on


councils, and that ancient cities were essentially self-governed. Historians see


the Ancient City in its political and cultural context as well as its


aesthetic-architectural one.? As


Liebeschetz states, it was the political institutions, the entertainments, the


arts and the festivals that helped unite social groups within these cities.? So, when analysing the ending of Ancient


Cities we must look at the physical changes, but also the political, social and


cultural ones.There are a number of problems


that we encounter when dating the ending of the Ancient City.? Ancient Cities developed where the Roman


Empire developed and it would be overly simplistic to think that the Roman


cities in the Eastern Provinces and those in the Western provinces ended at the


same time.? More fundamentally we must


ask what we mean by the ending of an Ancient City. Different definitions will


certainly bring differing dates. The remains of Ancient Cities co-existed with


the new forms of cities for centuries.?


Indeed many buildings from the Ancient City were converted or simply


abandoned.? It is wiser therefore to


talk of the ending of the political and cultural characteristics.? Clearly no precise date will fit all cities,


but by the end of the 6th century, and certainly at the start of 7th


century, we can say that most Ancient Cities had ended.? By this point many cities in the Balkans,


such as Stobbi, Nicpolis and Phillioopopolis had few signs of urban life at


all.? A more common consequence seems to


be the fortification of a much contracted city area. This is seen to some


extent in Rome and Constantinople.? Most


importantly, and perhaps most consistently, we see that very few curiales, or


councils, survived into the 7th century.? There is evidence of curiale activity in 590, but this was by no


means the norm.? These dates are


necessarily vague.? The geographical


range of cities and the less than easy to measure criteria make it impossible


to give a more precise date, but we can say that by this period very few cities


could be labelled as ?Ancient?.Traditionally a large amount of


blame for the ending of the Ancient Cities has been apportioned on a series of


damaging events.? Many of these events


occurred in 6th century. Serious outbreaks of plague, invasions,


wars, swarms of locusts and earthquakes afflicted many Ancient Cities, but


especially those in the East.? According


to C. Mango the plague of 542 had severe demographic consequences.? He cites the facts that the plague mainly


affected the young and that it recurred roughly every fifteen years.??? Famine was also common in this


period.? A temporary food shortage was


bearable, but any prolonged shortage was disastrous.? Poor infrastructure meant that agricultural surpluses from


elsewhere could not be imported to alleviate the shortages.? At the peak of the famine in Edessa it is


thought that 180 people a day died of starvation.? Mango believes that the increased price of wheat and the ensuing


inflation that followed famines were a major reasons for urban to rural


migration.? The effect of sacking and


invasions seems even more pronounced.?


Sirmium, once an imperial capital never recovered after a Hunnic sack,


and was completely deserted after an Avar invasion in 582.? It would be overly simplistic to suggest


that these were primary reasons for the ending of ancient cities.? Yes, these factors may have hastened the


fall of the ancient cities, but as we shall see more structural changes had


been transforming cities well before the 6th century. The curial led


self-administration of ancient cities was a central Graeco-Roman


characteristic.? Curiales, or decursions,


were usually landowners who were given the responsibility of administering the


city.? In the first three centuries this


civic responsibility was seen as an honour.?


Curiales competed for status within the city by donating money for civic


buildings and decoration, and on a higher level a city?s status was highlighted


by the quantity and quality of its civil buildings.? However, the responsibilities of curiales became increasingly


burdensome.? As early as the 4th


century we see curiales bemoaning the pressures placed on them from the


imperial authorities.? The burden of


collecting tax was increased as the imperial government requested more and more


revenue for its enlarged bureaucracy and continued war campaigning.? The curiale classes were not only forced to


collect more revenue, but on a personal level it has been suggested that they


had to relinquish up to one third of their income.? For most the financial pressures became too much.? Many escaped into the increasingly large


imperial service.? The imperial service


had many advantageous perks including virtual tax immunity.? A large number joined the clergy as a way of


evading their duties.? Some even turned


to an ascetic life and renounced their property.? Curial positions were taken by the less well off. ?They lacked the resources to maintain


existing civic buildings let alone create new ones.? The weakening of the education system also damaged the curial


order.? The education system was


severely damaged by the imperial and local persecution of Pagans.? Mango suggests that by the end of the 6th


century higher education survived only in Constantinople, Alexandria and


Berytus.? Indeed by 726 a contemporary


source noted the ?extinction of schools?. This is hardly reflective of a


continuing literary tradition. Many of the landowning elite


moved away to the countryside.? The


ruralization of the powerful elites is often cited as a reason for the end of


the Ancient City.? A classical city


could hardly survive without its richest and most educated citizens.? Late Roman aristocrats certainly spent time


in their villas and by the 5th century landowners were able to


fortify their lands.? The case of


Ecdicius using his army to resist the Visogths in 471 is a case in point. The


decline in the literary tradition of the cities will have aided this move to


the countryside.? Similarly the


imposition of the collegia, or tax on craftsmen, may have caused a migration of


>

artisans from town to country.?


Archaeological evidence shows that villages themselves were becoming


increasingly fortified.? However it is


difficult to distinguish between the pull factors of the rural monasteries and


the push factors of the falling cities.?


There is little empirical evidence of a large increase in the rural


population and we can question the extent of this ruralization. The large-scale


church building in the 5th and 6th centuries was funded


by donations from benefactors, and it would seem highly unlikely that elites


living outside the city would fund such status giving monuments.? We cannot accurately judge the level of


ruralization in this period, but we can say that the dynamic between the


countryside and the urban centres had changed.?


Liebschuetz uses the decline in the Roman tax system and the fact that


the imperial army increasingly recruited from the peasantry as the basis for


suggesting that the integration of urban centre and surrounding territory had


ended.? He also suggests that this


relationship was ?the principle character? of the ancient city. This statement


is questionable and as we have seen previously we can also doubt the level of


breakdown between city and countryside, especially in the east where we


continue to see agricultural markets throughout the period.The Christianisation and


Islamicisation of the Roman Empire were major factors in the transformation of


Ancient Cities.? We see from the period


of church-building in late 5th and 6th centuries, notably


in Trier and Cologne, that urban cities had become dominantly Christian


especially in the West.? Indeed the 4th


and 5th centuries saw the closing of many pagan temples.? The cultural landscape had changed which in


turn changed the physical landscape.?


Rich benefactors were now cajoled into donating money for orphanages,


monasteries, old people?s homes and of course churches. In the ancient city


civic identity was expressed through the medium of building and decoration, but


in the Christian city civic identity was expressed through the cults of


saints.? For example the city of


Seleukia used the cult of St. Thelka to famines of c 500 to assert its identity


vociferously.? The change in emphasis


from secular to religious civil pride highlights the administrative role that


the church played.? The bishop, and his


clergy, took on the role of administering the towns after the demise of the


curiale classes.? In many cases the


church acted out a role as a social security system by redistributing wealth


from the elites to the poor. The Christianisation of urban life also led to a


decline in the activities that bonded urban Roman society.? The church viewed classic features of the


ancient city suspiciously.? It frowned


on the theatre and the hippodrome.? This


aversion to public entertainment can be viewed as a purely theological


phenomenon, or, more cynically, as an attempt to lure the masses into the


cities? increasingly large numbers of churches.? The impact of the growth of Islam


in the east was equally profound.?


Kennedy, whilst telling us of the significant architectural impact of


Islam in the east, also shows us the political and social effects.? The construction of mosques clearly changed


the physical landscape, but he points out that the Mosques took on a political


and social function too.? Mosques can be


seen as an equivalent to the hippodromes or theatres of the classic city.? The religious function of the mosque was


complemented by educational and legal functions.? We see other facets of Islam affecting the physical appearance of


eastern cities.? The home and the family


are fundamental to Islam and this was reflected in their usage of public


space.? Public space in the classical


city was dependent on the relevant civic authorities having the power to stop


encroachment, but the Islamic state was more minimalist than its Roman


counterpart.? Thus we see the erosion of


public space as families built their houses on or indeed in, public space.? The Muslim attitude to commerce also had an


effect on the appearance of eastern cities.?


The Roman attitude to commercial activity was neutral at best, but the


Muslims saw honest commercial activity as more meritorious than civil or


governmental work.? This change in


emphasis saw the development of suqs, or narrow alleys ideally suited for an


abundance of retail outlets, at the expense of the classic colonnaded


streets.? These cultural changes had direct


and profound physical effects, which were intertwined with political, social


and economic changes. It is worthwhile to note that,


while we see a change in urban cities away from Ancient models, it would be


wrong to suggest that we see a universal decline in cities.? Yes, many cities did decline in terms of


population and size.? As we have seen


many cities contracted and fortified around a much-reduced base, whilst others


disappeared all together.? Older


historians have suggested that the transformation of cities away from the


classic ideal has represented a decline.?


They cite a decline from the classical ideal to urban squalor in the


newly Islamicised cities.? These loaded


statements go beyond the scope of the historian by adding value arguments to an


already complex field.? Such arguments


gloss over more important aspects of urban change.? For example, the cities of Damascus and Aleppo were undoubtedly


transformed from classical cities into vibrant Islamic cities.? More old-fashioned historians would call


this a decline, but evidence suggests that urban vitality actually increased as


a result of the Islamicisation.? When


approaching this area we must be careful not to let value judgements cloud our


interpretation and analysis.We have seen that localised


events, socio-economic processes and cultural changes contributed to the demise


of the ancient cities.? By over


estimating the effect of the 6th century disasters we construct an


overly simplistic argument.? Some cities


did indeed succumb to invasion and maybe even plague, but the majority


survived.? However these cities were no


longer ancient.? The flight of the


curiales, the ruralization of the elites, the decline in education and the new


cultures of Christianity, and in the later period Islam, had been changing the


cities for centuries.? The


transformation of cities, not the decline, was long and slow.? Our study shows us that this transformation,


whilst ending a great classical tradition, was regenerative as well as


destructive.

Сохранить в соц. сетях:
Обсуждение:
comments powered by Disqus

Название реферата: When And Why Does The ancient City

Слов:2288
Символов:15719
Размер:30.70 Кб.