Wim Boerefijn

Wim Boerefijn, New towns of the twelfth to fourteenth centuries and the grid plan. The collapse of the western Roman empire led to a long period of urban decline in western Europe. From about the 10th century onwards, however, urban life revived. Initially, this happened particularly in existing settlements – often in remnants of Roman cities, towns and fortresses – that grew and were gradually promoted to towns and cities. But towns were also created anew, almost from scratch, in short periods of time. This became more and more usual as more and more landlords sought to profit from the urban boom. Unfortunately, little is known of how this was done. In the following chapter, various aspects of these new urban creations will be outlined in the perspective of the heritage of the ancient colonial city, beginning with a short introduction of the phenomenon and subsequently focusing on spatial planning and the grid plan in particular.

This essay is the second preliminary version of a paper that I intend to publish as an article in an architectural-historical journal or a relevant collection of papers. This article is about the urban project of the ‘Esposizione Universale di Roma’ (also known as EUR or E42), the ‘city’ that was created to stage the World’s fair of 1942 in Rome under the fascist regime of dictator Benito Mussolini. (fig.1) Much has already been written about it, in particular about its architectural style, but I believe that I can contribute some new ideas as to its original urbanistic design. I have three new hypotheses, which are interconneted and rather speculative in character. The first is that the whole layout was oriented on Mussolini’s residence. The second is that it was also oriented on Tunis or the ancient city of Carthage. And the third is that the whole project for the universal exposition was secretly meant for the (symbolical) honouring of the ‘Duce’ and his imperial ambitions, and that under the guise of peaceful international cooperation it was in a sense a trap for the international community to implicitly contribute to these imperial ambitions. Unfortunately, I am not able to substantiate my arguments with hard evidence, but I wil try to make them plausible by circumstantial evidence and comparison. If there is any truth in my ideas, they demonstrate that the plan for E42 was even more megalomanic than it already appeared to be and that the aspect of personality cult of the leader was even stronger than it already seemed.

Van de dertiende tot de vijftiende eeuw werden vele nieuwe steden aangelegd in West-Europa.' Onder een nieuwe stad wordt hier verstaan: een plaats waarvan uit verschillende bronnen kan worden afgeleid dat er op initiatief van een heer, soms ook van burgers, binnen relatief korte tijd een nieuwe nederzetting werd aangelegd met een bepaalde omvang en een stratenplan van een zekere complexiteit en regelmaat. Vaak kwam een nieuwe stad tot stand bij een kasteel of bestaande (kleine) nederzetting, maar kenmerkend is dat de stad, in het bijzonder de plattegrond, een nieuwe creatie was. Daarnaast werden vele steden of steden in wording voorzien van uitbreidingen en stadsdelen met een nieuw aangelegde plattegrond. In de Nederlanden verrees vooral in de veertiende eeuw een groot aantal nieuwe steden, waaronder IJsselstein, Vianen, Buren, Naarden en Elburg. Plaatsen als Delft, Leiden en Gouda werden in dezelfde tijd uitgebreid met nieuwe stadsdelen. Over de manier waarop deze steden en uit...

In the historiography of town planning, one still finds the old idea that the straight street is typical for the Renaissance, whereas medieval streets would typically be curved or crooked and irregular. In this article, this idea will be contested with the evidence of the scarce written sources concerning the subject of the layout of the city street from the twelfth to sixteenth centuries and of the urban form of the new towns that were built in that period. It will also be shown that traditional interpretations of the famous passage from Alberti’s De re aedificatoria, which describes the advantages of winding streets as compared to straight streets, are largely wrong. Moreover, it will be argued that the general idea of medieval town building as something completely different than Renaissance town building is not correct.

Wim Boerefijn, New towns of the twelfth to fourteenth centuries and the grid plan.
The collapse of the western Roman empire led to a long period of urban decline in western Europe. From about the 10th century onwards, however,  urban life revived.  Initially, this happened particularly in existing settlements – often in remnants of Roman cities, towns and
fortresses – that grew and were gradually promoted to towns and cities. But towns were also created anew, almost from scratch, in short periods of time. This became more and more usual as more and more landlords sought to profit from the urban boom. Unfortunately, little is known of how this was done. In the following chapter, various aspects of these new urban creations will be outlined in the perspective of the heritage of the ancient colonial city, beginning with a short introduction of the phenomenon and subsequently focusing on spatial planning and the grid plan in particular.

In the historiography of town planning, one still finds the old idea that the straight street is typical for the Renaissance, whereas medieval streets would typically be curved or crooked and irregular. In this article, this idea will be contested with the evidence of the scarce written sources concerning the subject of the layout of the city street from the twelfth to sixteenth centuries and of the urban form of the new towns that were built in that period. It will also be shown that traditional interpretations of the famous passage from Alberti’s De re aedificatoria, which describes the advantages of winding streets as compared to straight streets, are largely wrong. Moreover, it will be argued that the general idea of medieval town building as something completely different than Renaissance town building is not correct.

Many hundreds of new towns were founded in different parts of Europe between the 11th and 14th centuries, but most of them were realized in the 13th and 14th centuries, with a peak-period at the end of the 13th. All kinds of landlords, from the highest to the lowest rank, tried to found new towns on their estates, in order to gain economical, political or military power. Most of these towns originally had a more or less agrarian character and remained relatively small. Unfortunately, we still know little of the methods used in town planning back in those days, since there are few sources that inform us on the subject. Most new towns were erected on the sites of existing settlements that were either erased or extended. The plans vary greatly, ranging from irregular to very regular in structure. Settlers were attracted by granting them fiscal, economical and judicial privileges, or they were simply forced to move from elsewhere. Little is known of the planners of these towns, but it seems that they often were administrative officers, rather than professionals from the building trade.

In the period of about 1150 to 1350, many towns were newly planned and built in Europe. Unfortunately, little is known of how this exactly happened. This article treats several aspects of new town creation that
connect to the subject of ‘Hausforschung’, particularly the form and layout of the original house lots and the building of the first generation of houses.

Contribution to a discussion in the section Viewpoints in the journal Urban Morphology, which was started by Keith Lilley in 1998, with further contributions bij Terry Slater and Tony Scrase in 1999. On the role and nature of the geometry that was used in medieval town planning.

Contribution to a discussion in the section Viewpoints in the journal Urban Morphology, which was started by Keith Lilley in 1998, with further contributions bij Terry Slater and Tony Scrase in 1999. On the role and nature of the geometry that was used in medieval town planning.

Short abstract

The dissertation deals with the creation of new towns in Europe in the 12th to 14th centuries. The structure of settlement in Europe, as it presently is, was created for a considerable part in this period. Many hundreds of new towns were founded in different parts of Europe between the 11th and 15th centuries, but most of them were realized in the 13th and 14th centuries, with a peak-period at the end of the 13th. All kinds of land¬lords, from the highest to the lowest rank, tried to found new towns on their estates, in order to gain economical, political or military power. The settlers of the new towns were attracted by fiscal, economical and judicial privileges granted by the founding lords, or they were simply forced to move from elsewhere. Unfortunately, we still know relatively little of the methods used in town planning back in those days, since there are relatively few sources that inform us on the subject.
In the past decades quite some research has been done on towns that are newly planned in the period of about the 12th to 14th centuries. But in comparison to town planning from the 15th century on, the subject is still relatively little studied. The research is mostly limited to the scope of a single town and sometimes it concerns a specific group of towns in a specific region or from a specific founder. Only in very few cases it considers larger groups of a specific period or of specific countries. Therefore, the intention of the dissertation is to look at the subject of new town planning in the broader perspective of the Latin-Christian part of Europe in general, in order to create an overview. The emphasis therein will be on the period of the second half of the 13th and first half of the 14th century.
This research is qualitative and explorative in character. The main goal is to reconstruct and describe the process of town foundation from the first idea to the actual realization, primarily in respect to the spatial layout of the project. This process was more or less different for every town, but by combining the material of many different new town foundations in different regions of Europe, a description of the process will be formulated in general terms, so that it is valid for many different cases. In the final part, this dissertation also deals with the 19th- and 20th-century historiography of (new) town planning in the period under consideration, in order to explain why important results of my research do not match with a number of traditional ideas and theories.

Part I (ch.1 - 4) of the dissertation contains three case studies of groups of new towns in different regions of Europe. These three groups of towns are selected for their variety in geographical location within Europe, their variety in form and the variety of founding lords and their motivations. The first chapter considers the towns founded in North Wales by king Edward I of England in the late 13th century. In chapter 2 the bastides of southwest France are studied. These newly created towns were founded from c.1230 to c.1350 by various lords of different ranks. Chapter 3 discusses six towns, known as terre nuove, that were founded by the city republic of Florence (Tuscany) between 1299 and 1350. The three groups of town are compared in chapter 4, specifically with regard to the various founders and their motives, the sort of sites where the towns were built and the plan forms of the towns.
In part II (ch.5 - 9) some important aspects of the planning of new towns in the period under consideration, are studied from a thematic point of view. The choice of sites for new towns is investigated in chapter 5; the methods of design, specifically the use of geometry, is closely studied in chapter 6; in chapter 7 the subject of the professional status of the persons involved in the planning or design of the towns is discussed; and in chapter 8 ideologies from the 13th and 14th centuries concerning the phenomenon of the town and its society are examined. Chapter 9 then, is synthetical in character: a reconstruction is given of the process of town plantation as it would generally have taken place, and the various elements that generally formed part of the physical form of a new town are discussed.

For the study of these themes, the material treated in the first three chapters plays a main role, and is used together with material from other newly founded towns elsewhere. In this way a general picture is given of the phenomenon of new town foundation in the period.
Finally, part III of the dissertation (ch.10 - 12) deals with the way that town building of the 11th to 14th centuries has been treated in the historiography of town building in the past 150 years or so. More specifically, it deals with some particular problems with this historiography, that have been encountered during the research for this study. Like in part II, material from different parts of Europe is treated in these chapters. In chapter 10 the European new town foundations of the period are placed within a wider temporal and geographical perspective, in order to understand their importance and their place in the general history of town planning. The (mis)use of modern typologies of the towns of the period will be analysed in chapter 11. Chapter 12, finally, examines the traditional perception of the form and formation of the ‘medieval town’, the question why that perception does not correspond with the material treated in this study, and how this conflict might be solved.

As already noted in chapter 10, many more towns were newly created in the 12th to 14th centuries than in the centuries before and after; for that reason we have used the term ‘high-period of town foundation’.  Despite that fact, the general idea that people have (the lay public as well as many scholars) is that real town planning only came to be practiced from about the middle of the 15th century. The idea is that the art of town planning was reborn under the influence of recovered knowledge of antique theory and practice during the so-called ‘(Italian) renaissance’. Since about the 19th century, scholars have thought that the straight street, the orthogonal town plan and spatial regularity in general, are typical aspects of ‘renaissance town planning’; and, conversely, ‘the medieval town’ has been regarded as an irrational and irregular ensemble of winding streets and narrow alleys within a tightly confining town wall, which has grown more or less spontaneously. Despite the more recent publication of various studies that clearly show that this image is wrong, it is still adhered to by many scholars. Chapter 11 goes into this traditional perception of the form and formation of the ‘medieval town’ and how it came about, the question of why that perception does not correspond with the material treated in this study, and how this conflict might be solved.
The misconceived cliché images of ‘medieval’ and ‘renaissance town building’ are due to the selective non-representative choice and over-generalising treatment of examples of historical urban structures (Siena, Bruges, etc.) and to axiomatic ideas with regard to non-rational and rational thought in the periods of ‘the middle ages’ and ‘the renaissance’ or, for that matter, ‘modern times’. In general history, and maybe more so in art history, the periods of ‘the middle ages’ and ‘the renaissance’ are traditionally viewed as contrasting temporal entities, and this view has also been forced on the history of town building. Concluding from the material treated in the previous chapters, it is obvious that the cliché image of ‘medieval town building’ is incorrect. (pars.11.1, 11.2, 11.4)
And the same holds true for the cliché image of ‘renaissance town building’, since it is based largely on the theoretical writings of the 15th to 17th centuries and the few towns that were built according to their principles, and not on the general practice of town building in the period. Considering the actual practice of town building, it clearly appears that the idea of the antithetical juxtaposition of ‘medieval town building’ to ‘renaissance town building’ is largely nonsense. In fact, there was an ongoing development rather than a sudden change. There surely were more or less sudden changes, but these concerned town planning theory (the new theoretical treatises) and fortification techniques (polygonal circuits of earthen walls and ditches with projecting bulwarks instead of stone walls with towers), and these new elements had only a limited impact on the actual practice of new town building. (par.11.3)
The misconceptions considering the development of town building through history appear to have been largely caused by the historiographical practice of classifying history into distinct periods, in this case ‘middle ages’ and ‘renaissance’. This classification into periods was originally meant as a model, a tool, for the study of (art) history. But little by little the canonical historical periods have come to be seen as an historical reality. The imperative vision of history as being divided into the separate periods of ‘middle ages’ and ‘renaissance’ or ‘the modern period’, has blurred our view of real developments in the history of town building, and has led to the distorted cliché images of ‘medieval’ and ‘renaissance town building’. The careless use of period classification easily leads to the confirmation of the model, at the cost of a proper view of continuity and gradual developments. (par.11.4)
Periodisation can be a very useful tool for the study of history, particularly specific aspects of it. For instance, periodisation in geologic periods, in cultural eras (such as the paleolithic or the industrial eras), in political-administrative eras or ruling dynasties can be very sensible and helpful, as long as we do not take the periods as absolutes. It seems, however, that the classification into art historical style periods, such as romanesque, gothic, renaissance, mannerism, baroque, etc., which in itself is quite subjective (as the distinctions are not very clear or generally accepted), has led to a lot of confusion and unwanted connotations being associated with the period-terms. This confusion has become even greater as the terms for the styles and style-periods of art historical origin have found their way into other historiographical disciplines. (par.11.4)
Based on the study of the history of town building one can conclude that it is obvious that the classification into the traditional art historical style-periods or even the more general historical periods of ‘middle ages’ and ‘the modern period’ is, for the most part, quite senseless. In my opinion we should be very careful with periodisation, and particularly with the traditional art historical style-periods. This goes for the study of the history of town building, but also for other historical disciplines. In general, it would be wise to use more neutral time indications than the terms applied to the traditional (art) historical periods with all their connotations, and we should not immediately classify history into periods or styles without there being a concrete necessity to do so. We should keep an open mind, and we must try to use the historical matter, event or thought under consideration to teach us about history, instead of forcing it into our view of history before it can tell us its story. (pars.11.3, 11.5)

The European new town foundations of the 13th and 14th centuries are placed within a wider temporal and geographical perspective in chapter 10. New towns were already founded long before the period of this study. Archaeologists have found urban centres that were most probably newly created according to more or less accurate planning from, among other places, the ancient Egyptian empire, the Harappan culture in the Indus-valley, the ancient Chinese empires and the pre-Columbian civilizations of central America, and in Europe from the ancient Greeks, the Lausatian culture and, of course, from the Roman Empire. (par.10.1)
After the fall of the Western Roman Empire many urban settlements in Europe succumbed to invasions of foreign peoples and the collapse of trade. In this period very few towns were newly founded. From about the 10th-11th centuries on, improving conditions meant that the population and the economy started to grow again. This resulted in, among other things, the growth of settlements and of the area of cultivated land, as well as in the creation of new villages and towns. Many of the newly created settlements are clearly recognisable as planned structures by their relatively regular and basically orthogonal plan structures. Many scholars have tried to identify a common source of these urban orthogonal plan structures. It has often been suggested that Roman colonial towns or forts were taken as models. This does not seem very likely, however, as there are no concrete indications that support this idea. Other scholars have suggested that the source of the orthogonal town plans of the post-Roman period can be found in town foundations in 12th-century Italy, 11th-century Flanders or England in the 8th century. In our opinion, however, there is no one and only source for the orthogonal town plans in Europe in the post-Roman period. Much as, on a world scale, the orthogonal plan was ‘invented’ independently in the ancient Near East, China and central America, it seems to have been ‘invented’ on different occasions in post-Roman Europe as well. After all, it is a fact that when the human mind seeks to create order on a two-dimensional plane - and the idea of order is, of course, fundamental in town planning - the orthogonal scheme is the most obvious solution. (par.10.2, 10.2.1)
Looking at the plans of the newly founded towns of the period of about the 11th to 14th centuries, one can recognise a general development in the town plans towards greater spatial regularity, which tended to work towards true orthogona¬lity. This tendency was especially evident during the 13th century. It seems to have been caused by a growing experience with town foundations and an increasing striving for spatial order. This increasing interest in the regularity of spatial partition had to do with the pecuniari¬sation of the land due to its growing scarcity relative to the increasing population, as well as with the general trend of quantification, which changed the perception of time, space, movement and matter. Apart from that, the desire for a regularized spatial urban order also had to do with symbolic values.  (par.10.2.2)
After the high-period of town foundation, in most regions of Europe ending about halfway through the 14th century, relatively few new towns were created until the 19th century. Curiously enough, however, we are much better informed on the theory of town building from about the 15th century on by theoretical writings, and on actual projects by documents. The theoretical works were mostly treatises. These were initially inspired by the architectural treatise De Architectura libri X of Vitruvius, from about 30 B.C. This work had been copied ever since antiquity, but by the 15th century it inspired authors to write architectural treatise of a more or less similar sort. Therefore, there is a distinction to be drawn between the period of about the 12th to 14th centuries and that of about the 15th to 18th centuries. In the first period many new towns were created in Europe; but we barely know anything about town building theory in this period, presumably because there was not much explicit theorisation in this field. In the second period it was the other way around. So, from the first period we mainly know practice, and from the second we mainly know theory.  (par.10.3)
In the second period, many new towns were built under European rule, but this happened mainly in the overseas colonies. Like the Greek and Roman colonial towns, these new settlements were mostly laid out on orthogonal grid plans. Various scholars have claimed that the planners of the new colonial towns, particularly the Spanish, were explicitly inspired in this by Roman examples and by Roman theory and that, therefore, the new towns formed a genuine product of ‘renaissance’ thought. This idea is, however, largely wrong. It seems to stem from an inherent urge to link historical events to what have generally come to be seen as typical ideas of the period, in this case ‘the renaissance’. Actually, the layouts of the new colonial towns rather appear to be the product of the tradition of new town planning in Europe in the previous centuries, as were most of the relatively few new towns that were still being created in Europe. In fact, the new towns that had been created in Europe were also ‘colonial towns’ in a certain sense: particularly those that were built in newly conquered territories, such as those founded by the English in Wales and those founded in Spain after the reconquista from Muslim rule. But in another sense it also holds for those that were created in territories that were newly reclaimed and opened up to interregional trade, as with many of the bastides and towns in Eastern Europe and the Baltic. Even the Florentine terre nuove can be seen as colonial towns, in the sense that they were colonial foundations of the city of Florence in a rather hostile countryside. (par.10.3.1)
The regular orthogonal grid was used over and over again through history, for creating new spatial order on the land and, particularly, in nucleated settlements. This is not so strange, since it is the simplest system for regular allotment and orientation that we know. With this system, authorities could enforce their spatial order on existing natural and cultural structures. In this way, it could function as an instrument and symbol of dominion, of man over nature or of one authority over society. (par.10.4)

In chapter 9 a reconstruction is attempted of the process of town creation as it would generally have taken place in Europe in about the 12th to 14th centuries (pars.9.1-9.10), and in the second part of the chapter the various physical elements of the towns under consideration are discussed (pars.9.11-9.23).

Since the organisation of society is a very important aspect in the human world-view, the landscape of settlement, which is the artificially created stage of human society, must necessarily reflect ideology, and particularly ideas about the organisation of society. One would expect that this must be even more true when explicit planning, which is implicitly aimed at order, is at issue, as in the planning of new towns. In chapter 8 the subject of ideology relating to the phenomenon of the town and its society is studied, for as far as it is relevant to the creation of new towns in the period.
The chapter first deals with ideologies relating to civic society, both in general as well as concerning its spatial form. In Christian thought, the ultimate ideal of society is heaven. In the bible, this Christian heaven is described in the form of the Heavenly Jerusalem, which is a city on a mountain with a square outline and having a city wall with three gates in every side. The contemporary Christian ideal of the earthly city was the Civitas Dei, as described by the church father St. Augustine. The spatial form of the Civitas Dei is not described by Augustine, but it was usually depicted in the form of a circle or a polygon. One would expect that the form of newly founded towns of the period would have been inspired by these ideals. There are, however, no clear signs of this. Elements of these ideals can be found in churches and monasteries, and even in towns, but they are not reflected in the urban layout, for as far as known. (par.8.1)
In various texts, however, real cities are compared to the ideal Christian cities. (par.8.2) In the late 14th century the Aragonese cleric Eiximenis was clearly inspired by the form of the Heavenly Jerusalem when he wrote a chapter entitled ‘Which form should the beautiful and well-built city have’. (par.8.2.1) There were new towns which we know to have been founded with ideological motives, such as the towns founded by the Hussite sect and other religious movements with eschatological expectations, and the (projects for the) foundations of Count Reinoud I of Gelre. In the latter case the urban forms do not appear to have been influenced by the ideology, but the Hussite town of Tábor may owe its highly irregular form to the fact that private property was initially renounced by the sect. (par.8.3) It seems likely that other societal ideologies - though also essentially Christian in character - were relevant for the Florentine terre nuove, where different classes of lot sizes were created, and for many other new towns where the house lots were initially all meant to be of equal size. But, unfortunately, there are no sources that clearly confirm this. (pars.8.5.1-8.5.2)
The conclusion of the first paragraphs of this chapter (pars.8.1 to 8.5) is that, with the vast part of the newly founded towns from the high-period of town foundation, there are no concrete indications that ideological motivations in the sense of societal ideals played an explicit role. It may well be, however, that the fact that so many towns were newly created was, to some extent, motivated by Christian societal ideals, but in an implicit way. I believe that it is illustrative in this respect that St. Thomas claimed, in his De regimine principum, that the city is the ‘[...] best form for the material and moral existence of man’, and that he wrote that the foundation of cities is one of the most important functions of a king, comparable to the foundation of the world by God.  (par.8.2)
So, societal ideals seem to have influenced the foundation of new towns and their shapes, at least to a certain extent. But it remains very vague to what extent precisely this was the case. The final part of the chapter considers aesthetic ideologies in relation to the urban form of newly planned towns and newly planned urban ensembles in existing towns. It appears that order and regularity were sought after in urban form because, apart from various practical considerations, they were experienced as beautiful and formed an aesthetic ideal that was related to the symbolism of moral righteousness and philosophical ideas concerning order in urban society and the structure of the Divine creation.  In fact, ideas about spatial, societal and cosmic order appear to have been linked to each other up to a certain extent in the field of urban planning. This resulted in public streets that were preferably straight, wide and with regular facades along them, and urban structures that were preferably regular and orthogonal, and thereby easily comprehensible and surveyable. (par.8.6)

Chapter 7 addresses the questions of who the planners of the spatial forms of the new towns were and what their profession was. The contemporary written sources generally do not mention anything about the planners of new towns, but it is obvious that with the creation of a new town a plan would mostly have been thought out in more or less detailed form, before the work on the site actually began. In modern literature on newly created towns from the high-period of town foundation, many authors - particularly scholars with a background in the discipline of architecture and urban planning, rather than in history - ascribe the spatial planning to professional architectural designers, or even to professional town planners. This, however, appears to be a retro-projection of the modern situation, which is not justified by the evidence of the sparse sources. Various persons who are known by name from historical documents, such as Elias of Dereham and mansionaius Lambertus, are taken to be professional architects or ‘building masters’ who planned new towns, in these cases New Salisbury and Fribourg. But in every case I investigated it appeared either that the person involved was not a professional from the building trades but rather was a kind of general organiser, or that the mentioned person may have been a professional but that he cannot be positively identified as the designer of the urban layout. (par.7.1)
In ancient narrative sources, which are usually from some time after the town foundation, the design of a new town is often ascribed to the founding lord. It appears, however, that this is a topos that must not be taken literally. Probably, the lord generally assigned an officer to oversee the job, who may have assigned someone else to design the spatial layout. (par.7.2)

To the extent that contemporary written sources mention specific people involved in the planning of new urban structures at all, they are almost always concerned with persons who were responsible for the general organisation¬ and admini¬strati¬on of the project: clerics, clerks, notaries, officers and notable civilians, such as the men in the committees that were responsible for the planning of Giglio Fiorentino in Tuscany and Berwick-upon-Tweed in northern England. (par.7.2) The sources also mention entrepreneurs who were engaged in the planning of villages and, less often, towns. They are particularly numerous in the lands east of the river Elbe, where they were generally designated as locatores. (par.7.3) For all these officials and entrepreneurs it is not known in what measure they actually were involved in the spatial planning of the urban structures but, given the lack of sources that suggest otherwise, they must be held responsible. Various scholars have wrongly labelled these men as professional town planners, whereas other scholars suppose that they must have hired others that were experienced specifically in spatial planning. It would seem likely, indeed, that the experience was used of men who had been doing the same job previously elsewhere in the time before. It seems particularly likely that, when several towns were created for the same lord, he set the same men to work at the different towns. But there are no written sources to confirm this, apart from the notary Pons Maynard at the bastides of Montréal-du-Gers and Castillionès, the committee that was involved in the foundation of Castelfranco, San Giovanni and a third town in the Valdarno di Sopra in Tuscany, the ordenadors and stablidors that were to create fourteen new towns on Mallorca, and a number of locatores that were involved in the planning of several villages and towns east of the river Elbe. In a certain sense, one might call these people (part-time) town planners, but with this it is essential to note that the most important part of their job probably was to organise and oversee the operation of the creation of new towns, rather than to design their urban form. (pars.7.3, 7.5, 7.6, 7.9)
Regarding the new towns of Wales, there are no concrete indications of who planned them, but for the new towns that were founded there in relation to military campaigns and that were laid out in relation to new castles (for instance Flint, Conwy, Caernarfon and Beaumaris), it seems logical to ascribe the spatial planning to military architectural designers, such as the ‘master of the king’s works in Wales’, James of St. George. Elsewhere in Europe, military architectural designers or engineers may also have been involved in the spatial planning of towns if they were planned with military motives. (pars.7.2, 7.4)
Concerning the Florentine terre nuove, Giorgio Vasari’s Vite of the 16th century identified the architects/sculptors Arnolfo di Cambio and Andrea Pisano as designers. These attributions appear not to be very reliable, however. That Andrea Pisano was involved is most unlikely; Arnolfo’s involvement is not unlikely but can not be verified and, given Vasari’s intentions, may well be a fabrication. According to surviving documents, the realisation of the town of Scarperia was given over to the administrative and military officer of the region, and the other towns were realised under committees made up of officials that were chosen from the politically active citizenry of the city. According to the main authority on the terre nuove, David Friedman, professional architectural designers who acted as advisors to the committees must have designed the layouts, but this seems to be unwarranted, as there are no concrete sources that confirm this view. (par.7.6)
For new towns of the 12th to 14th centuries in general it seems valid, given the lack of sources, to assume that surveyors who were involved in the setting out of spatial structures may also have designed those structures. There are only a few references to the involvement of professional surveyors in the laying out of new towns, but it is a fact that someone had to mark out the planned layout on the land, and it is likely that this was often done by surveyors. These surveyors may have been full-time professionals, or they may have been notaries, monks, teachers of geometry or people from other professional backgrounds who did the job on the side, as we know from a small number of written sources. Actually, there is one contemporary text which identifies a ‘geometrician’ by the name of Symon, probably a surveyor or part-time surveyor, as the planner of the layout of an urban extension at Ardres in northern France. (par.7.7)

From the groups of towns treated in chapters 1 to 3 it clearly appears that the layout of most newly founded towns was largely planned. But unfortunately there are hardly any contemporary sources that provide information on how this was done. In the scholarly literature since the late 19th century many authors have, however, proposed theories concerning the methods of the design of new town plans. Many of them suggest that, particularly in the 12th to 14th centuries, complex geometric methods were used. Some of these theories are discussed in chapter 6.
In most of the plans of newly founded towns of the period, one can recognise an inclination towards regularity and orthogonality. It is obvious that there must have been a very basic idea of geometrical order behind this, involving straight lines, right angles, equality of distances and often even symmetry. Some scholars believe that plans which are more or less regular have been laid out by use of very simple geometry, by setting out straight boundaries at regular distances that were determined as rational, mostly rounded, numbers of the then current units of measurement. This is called ‘arithmetic design’ or ‘simple geometric design’. Scholars have tried to reconstruct specific cases of this method of design on the basis of measurements taken from specific town plans (either in reality or in more or less accurate plans on paper). This has led to various reconstructions, not all of which appear to be very reliable, however, as the accuracy of the measurements that have been taken varies greatly and the probability varies with the deviation that is accepted between measured dimensions and hypothetical original dimensions. (par.6.1)
Other scholars, however, believe that urban plans were designed by the use of more or less complex geometrical methods. From contemporary sources it is known that geometry was regarded as a crucial means for architectural design. Not much is clear, however, on how geometry was precisely used in the design process of buildings, and almost nothing is known of whether and how it played a role in urban planning. Since the mid-20th century, a number of hypothetical design methods have been reconstructed, proposing complex geometric figures underlying the designs of the plans of specific towns. After close examination it appears, however, that many of these are quite implausible. In some cases the dimensions of the geometrical hypotheses clearly do not correspond well with the actual dimensions of the plans; while in other cases the supposed process of design is highly unlikely because it is anachronistically complicated or because it contradicts the inherent logic of the process. (par.6.2)
In this chapter a number of reconstructions, particularly concerning town plans of bastides and the Florentine terre nuove, are examined critically. It appears that theories by Higounet and Lauret et al., regarding the use of pythagorean triangles in the design of the bastides of Vianne and Villeneuve-sur-Lot are unlikely. (par.6.3.1) A theory put forward by Guidoni regarding a number of bastides that would have been dimensioned by the use of rotated squares also appears to be improbable. (par.6.3.2) The same holds true for a theory of complex geometric design by Bucher regarding Grenade-sur-Garonne. With respect to this town, metrological analysis actually suggests that it is far more likely that the relevant dimensions were rationally chosen as rounded numbers of the traditional local unit of measurement, the brasse. (par.6.3.3)
Regarding the plans of the Florentine terre nuove seven authors have proposed different geome-trical methods by which the most important dimensions would have been arrived at, while two authors have proposed simple arithmetic methods. Close examination of these hypotheses suggests that most of them are highly unlikely and that the hypotheses of Guidoni, Friedman and Pirillo, and an adjustment to Friedman’s theory by Van den Heuvel seem more plausible. (pars.6.4.1, 6.4.2 and app.B.2-B.3) In order to find out to what degree these proposals correspond to the actual existing urban structures, they are compared to the modern town plans of the relevant towns by graphical verification and metrological analysis. (pars.6.4.2 and more detailed in appendix B) From this analysis it appears most likely that relevant dimensions in the plans of San Giovanni, Castelfranco, Scarperia and Terranuova were arrived at by the use of geometrical figures underlying the plan, more or less as the theories of Guidoni and Friedman (and the suggestion by Van den Heuvel) claimed. The design method would have worked using regular polygons with 6, 12 or 24 sides, in order to determine the distance between alignments of street blocks and streets that lie parallel in the longitudinal direction of the plan. In the case of Terranuova this geometry probably also determined the placement of the transverse streets and the dimensions of the perimeter of the town. The town plan of Giglio Fiorentino, however, appears not to have been dimensioned in this complex geometrical way, but rather by simple arithmetic design, which most probably was also the case for a considerable part of the remaining dimensions in the plans of the other terre nuove. (par.6.4.2 and app. B)
Many scholars who have proposed hypothetical reconstructions of geometrical methods of urban design silently pass over the crucial question of why such methods would have been used. From philosophical writings of the 11th to 13th centuries it is known that great importance was attached to geometry and arithmetic as a means of understanding the Divine creation and to create beauty and order in harmony with the universe. It seems likely that many of the scholars who have proposed hypotheses for geometric design methods for town plans in the period under consideration tacitly believed that this inspired the use of these methods. In fact, this also seems to have been the reason for the geometric design method of the terre nuove: it was to bring the towns into auspicious harmony with the order of the Divinely created universe. The fact that the geometric figures bear likeness to circular or polygonal cosmic symbols and depictions of the Heavenly Jerusalem may also be interpreted as an indication of this meaning. An additional motive may have been that the designer aimed for personal reward and fame or the advancement of his profession, as geometry was such a highly valued art. (par.6.4.4) Unfortunately, it is impossible to discern what the relative importance of the different possible motives was and to what degree people - planners, settlers and the public - were conscious of them.
In conclusion, it is highly likely that four of the terre nuove plans were dimensioned by the use of complex geometric methods. This seems to be quite unique, however, as I know of no other new town plans of the period that are likely to have been designed by use of complex geometry. Many seem to have been planned by the use of relatively simple straight lines, right angles and arithmetical dimensioning. Moreover, one should also keep in mind that there are also newly created urban structures that were laid out with rather irregular non-geometric plans. Nonetheless, many scholars appear to have favoured the idea of complex geometric design over other possible methods, such as dimensioning by arithmetically determined distances and proportions. The plan of Grenade-sur-Garonne, for instance, has been featured prominently in literature on ‘geometric design of town plans in the middle ages’, although it appears quite clear, both from plan analysis and from a contemporary document which specifies the dimensions of the house lots, that relatively simple arithmetic design is a far more likely probability. Many scholars just assume that ‘medieval architectural design’ involved more or less complex geometric methods. Although these scholars often do not explicitly write so, this assumption seems to be largely (and often indirectly) based on contemporary texts that mention the importance of geometry for the understanding of Divine creation and texts that indicate that geometry was regarded as a very important element in architectural design. Furthermore, the assumption appears to be based on erroneous ideas about the ‘medieval mind’ thinking symbolically or mystically, and therefore not rationally, and of ‘medieval masons’ using ‘secret methods’. (par.6.5)
Geometry was a highly valued art and it surely was important in architectural design, but this does not mean that urban structures could not be designed on the basis of the simple geometry of the regular orthogonal grid and arithmetically determined dimensions. For a long time scholars have generally assumed that in ‘the middle ages’ geometry was the basis of architectural design, and that it was displaced by arithmetic in the ‘renaissance’. In our opinion, however, the supposed contrast between geometry and arithmetic as being completely different design methods of necessarily different periods, is wrong. I believe that this idea sprang from the more or less explicit view of history as being divided into different periods, in this case especially regarding the difference between ‘the modern period’, as essentially characterised by rationality and clarity, and ‘the middle ages’, which are regarded as mystical, dark and mysterious. This view is a gross simplification that obstructs a clear view on historical reality.  (par.6.5)

For the success of a town, it was of crucial importance that it was located on an auspicious site. Chapter 5 goes into the sites that were chosen for new towns in the period under consideration. Many of the newly founded towns were never successful simply because they were founded on sites that were badly chosen. The location had to offer at least some basic favourable conditions: there should be drinking water available and the area should offer the inhabitants the possibility to produce food products and raw materials sufficient to their making a living. For economic success, however, a town preferably had to be sited well within the larger system of settlement, so that it would profit from its location within the regional or interregional transport network. But not every lord that wanted to found a town could dispose of such good sites. And in some cases the goals of the foundations were not so much economic success but rather political or military strategy, which was often in some way bound to a particular area, thereby more or less precisely determining the location of the new town. (par.5.1)
It was generally a welcome factor if the site was easy to defend due to its specific location with respect to relief and water. For towns that were founded with military motives or which were sited in hostile regions, like the Anglo-Norman towns in Wales, this generally was an important consideration. But for most new towns this does not seem to have been so important, as they were sited on open land. Accessibility by road and water was an important factor, particularly for towns that were created with the main aim of attracting trade. (pars.5.1.1-5.1.3)
In order to attract enough goods and people to the market, a new town would normally best be located at a considerable distance from other market towns, generally at about 8 to 16 kilometers. Sometimes minimum distances were set out in law books or agreed on between lords and urban communities in the form of market monopolies. In areas of great importance for transport, on rivers or sea coasts, or in areas of extreme fertility or a wealth of minerals, towns could be set much closer to one another than elsewhere. But if towns were spaced too closely the general result would be that the ones with the least advantageous geographical position and the fewer tenurial privileges would not develop well. (par.5.1.4)
Of course, it was always necessary that the lord-founder could dispose of the site. Therefore it had to be in his own domain, or he could try to obtain the land by purchase, trade or simply by force. Another possibility was to seek collaboration from a local lord, in order to found a town in cooperation with him. Such collaborations of founding lords can be found in many regions of Europe, but they were particularly common in southwest France: the so-called paréages.  (par.5.1.5)
Many new towns were located on the sites of older settlements, such as hamlets, villages, abbeys or castles. Sometimes these older settlements were cleared away to make a place for new urban structures, as in the case of the terre nuove, but often they were (partly) incorporated into the new settlements. (par.5.1.6)
The settlers of the terre nuove mainly came from villages and hamlets in the surrounding countryside, as decided by the Florentine authorities. Most of these older settlements were located higher up in the hills and mountains. In the period from about the 12th century onward, this phenomenon of settlement moving from hilltops and mountain sides to plains can also be detected in many other European regions with hilly or mountainous terrain. (par.5.2) In earlier centuries it had been very important for settlements to be sited on sheltered locations that could be well defended, often right next to a castle; but in this later period accessibility became more important in order to stimulate regional and inter-regional trade in the town. Therefore, towns were preferably located at sites which were advantageous for traffic, on interregional roads and navigable rivers, which usually were to be found in the valleys. For the terre nuove and other new towns that were founded in the territories of powerful lords it is also significant that they formed part of developing territorial states, for which reason the maintenance of close contact to other nodes in these states, particularly the centre of power, by way of the traffic routes, was essential. (par.5.2)
Quite a number of the new towns of the 13th and 14th centuries in Europe were actually transplanted settlements. The lords of these settlements decided that other locations would be better suited. Particular reasons arguments made for these could be, for instance, that towns were damaged by floods, earthquakes or landslides and therefore had to be moved to safer places; that existing sites were too cramped, lacked drinking water, or that they were hard to defend. A more common reason for transplantation, however, was that the town, and particularly its market, was moved to the main traffic route or node of the area in order to profit from the growing regional and inter-regional trade. These routes and nodes may have already existed for a long time or may have been newly created in the period under consideration. It is also possible that important routes or nodes shifted from one road or port to the other, whether or not under the influence of natural conditions. A common new location for towns was the valley bottom, where (new) roads and navigable rivers were to be found. (pars.5.2, 5.3)

The so-called terre nuove fiorentine, a group of six towns in Tuscany, are studied in chapter 3. These towns, Castelfranco di Sopra, San Giovanni Valdarno, Scarperia, Firenzuola, Terranuova Bracciolini and Giglio Fiorentino, were all founded by the government of the city of Florence between 1299 and 1350. Although the last of these was never actually built, probably due to changing political circumstances, it is relatively well documented. Its original documents even include a description of the project and the town plan, which is a quite unique and very important source. (see appendix A). The towns were all located on main routes into the Florentine territory, at a distance of about 25 to 45 kilometres from the city, in the Valdarno di Sopra in the southeast and on a pass route through the Apennine mountains to the north of the city. It is likely that at least four of the six new towns were founded on the sites of older villages, which were removed in order to make a place for the new urban structures. (pars.3.8, 3.9.1)
The main motive for the founding of the terre nuove was the struggle of the Guelph city government against a revolt of the Ghibelline nobility in the Florentine countryside. The city authorities tried to regain control over the territory which had nominally belonged to the city since the Roman period, the so-called contado, in order to secure the flow of victuals and raw materials into the city. In addition to that, the new towns also served to control two of the most important routes into the contado, to secure their use for trade purposes and to block them for use by enemy forces. (par.3.5)
The new towns were mainly settled with people that previously lived in villages and hamlets in the surrounding areas. Although living in the new towns had advantages in the form of privileges and protection as Florentine subjects, and proximity to the main trade routes and the markets that were founded with the towns, it appears that these people sometimes had to be forced to take up their new place of residence, by the levying of fines and even by the destruction of their old houses. The terre nuove must be regarded as satellite towns of Florence, the more so because they only had limited autonomy. (pars.3.5.2, 3.6)
Looking at their urban form, it is immediately striking that the ground plans of the six towns show significant similari¬ties. They have strictly orthogonal street structures, based on a main street as a through route with parallel residential streets, a central rectangular piazza with a cross street extending from it, and narrow secondary cross streets (or alleys). Originally the outlines of the towns were rectangular, surrounded by wide ditches, stone walls with four gates and a wall street all along the inner side of the town walls. A very peculiar feature of their plans are the house lots, which originally were all of the same width, but which are progressively shorter the further they are from the central main street, which therefore really forms the axis of the urban structure. (pars.3.8, 3.9.2.1)
Firenzuola, however, does not share all these aspects, but it appears that its structure was considerably changed in the 15th or possibly already the late 14th century. Its original form must have been much more similar to the other terre. (par.3.8.4) Despite the fact that there are also considerable differences in plan form, such as in their dimensions and the number of streets, alleys and house lots, the simi¬larities in urban structure mark the terre nuove as a group which is clearly different from other new towns of the period, including other Florentine foundations. (par.3.9.2) The way in which the dimensions of the plans, and particularly the variation in the lengths of the house lots, are designed is treated in chapter 6.
Right from the outset of their foundation churches or chapels were built, and monastic communities settled in the towns not much later. (par.3.9.3.2) Every town had a ‘town hall’ where the representative of the Florentine government resided, overlooking the central piazza and in San Giovanni even standing right in the middle of the square. In most towns there also was a public loggia in the piazza, serving as a ceremonial space and probably also as a covered market space. In Scarperia the official residence was a castle-like stronghold, which also housed the garrison, while in Giglio Fiorentino a keep was planned in one of the corners of the town. (pars.3.9.3.3, 3.9.3.4) From the document which describes the project for Giglio Fiorentino, it is known that the houses on the main street were to have stone facades, two storeys and ceramic roof tiles. It is possible that there were similar regulations in the other towns. (par.3.9.3.5)
The terre nuove fiorentine were fairly fruitful projects. Giglio Fiorentino was never actually built, but the other town foundations were more or less successful. Three of the towns became the centres of administrative regions (vicariati) in the 14th century, and all five of the realised towns actually became market towns of some regional importance. Since the beginning of the 20th century, however, only San Giovanni is a town of economic significance with a really urban character; the other terre nuove are more like large villages. (pars.3.5.3, 3.5.4, 3.8, 3.10)

From the 12th to the first half of the 14th century many towns were created in the region of Aquitaine in southwest France. Chapter 2 specifically deals with the towns known as bastides, which were founded from c.1230 to c.1350 by various lords of different ranks. In the 11th century the region was still rather thinly populated and to a large extent uncultivated, despite its relatively fertile soils. Until the 13th century the area was largely in the hands of the counts of Toulouse (in the east) and the Plantagenet kings of England as dukes of Aquitaine (or Gascony, in the west), while many small lordships lay strewn more or less in between. With the Albigensian Crusade (1208-29), however, the French king gained control of the county of Toulouse, while the duchy of Aquitaine would follow in the 15th century. (par.2.1-2.3)
In the 11th to 13th centuries many settlements were newly created in this area. Monasteries and other ecclesiastical lords founded so-called sauvetés; while worldly lords created so-called castelnaux next to their castles. (par.2.3) A third group of new settlements, which are known from contemporary sources as bastides, was created from about 1230 to 1350 by various landlords. This group consists of more than 350 new towns, many of which were quite small, meant for about fifteen families, while some were quite large, planned for up to 3,000 families. (par.2.2) For the most part they were founded in cooperative agreements (paréage) between one or sometimes two local landlords, who contributed the land, and a superior lord, like a count or a king, who contributed military protection and special privileges, which were generally laid down in a charter. Some bastides, however, were founded by single lords on their own. (par.2.4.2)
Unlike what is generally thought, the motives for the foundation of a bastide appear to have been primarily of an economic character. Because many bastides were surrounded by town walls and lay in areas that were heavily contested, they have come to be regarded as fort-towns. But, for a large part of this region, the real military conflict only started in the second quarter of the 14th century, with the Hundred Years War between the French and the English crowns (1337-1453). This meant that many of the more important towns were walled several decades after they were founded. (par.2.5.1) The bastides were generally founded because landlords sought to increase the income from their land, by having it cultivated more intensely by renters who could bring their produce to market in the new towns, via which they were connected to the regional and international trade network. In particular, wine was a product that increasingly found its way to the international market. The lords profited from the economic activity by way of rents, taxes and tolls. (par.2.5.4) The settlers were partly newly attracted from elsewhere, but for the greatest part they seem to have been drawn together from villages and hamlets in the region. (par.2.8) Additional motives for the foundation of a new bastide might have been to create administrative centres and to increase the effectiveness of taxation. (par.2.5.3) But territorial and political strategy also played a role. Some bastides were founded in border areas over which the rights were not clearly defined, so that the founding lord could enlarge his territory or gain specific rights over the area by appropriation. (par.2.5.1) Another motive, which we know played a significant role in the foundation of a number of bastides, was to provide protection to travellers on through roads and to the inhabitants of a region from bands of robbers and possibly also from hostilities by the inhabitants of neighbouring settlements. (par.2.5.2)
Many foundations failed eventually. The 14th century brought economic crisis, poor harvests and the bubonic plague. These misfortunes were felt almost anywhere in Europe; but an important factor more specific to this region was the devastating effect of the Hundred Years War. In particular, the smaller bastides located on marginal lands often did not manage to survive these misfortunes. (par.2.4.7)
As to the form of the bastides, the generally held idea that they largely are of the same type is wrong. Since the 19th century it has become a common idea that the bastides are all fortified towns with highly regular orthogonal town plans, outlines that mostly are rectangular, and a central square that is surrounded by four streets passing underneath galleries. (par.2.10.3.1) It is indeed true that some of the bastides took this form, but they are relatively few and the fortifications were generally built only in a secondary phase, after their foundation. Many other plan forms exist, from very irregular to more or less circular, linear or gridded. There are almost too many varieties to describe, and there does not seem to be a clear link between specific types of urban structure and specific founders or areas. (par.2.10.3.2) In many cases, however, there is a clear link between the form of the pre-urban landscape and the sort of plan chosen but, for the most part, this does not allow us to say that the plan form can be directly explained by the topography. In general, the plans are quite regular in the layout of their streets, piazzas and allotments, which suggests that they were planned more or less precisely. (par.2.10.4)
In various publications the bastides are presented as though they, or at least many of them, were planned as an integral spatial part of the allotment of the agricultural fields that surround them. This idea appears to be based only on a few cases in which the grid system of the town’s streets extends outward into the surrounding area. In only one case, that of Saint-Denis-de-Saissac, does it appear that the town and an area around it, which may have been intended for gardens as well as for fields, are actually part of one large spatial grid system; but even there the layout is urban rather than agricultural in character. (par.2.10.6)

Chapter 1 treats the newly founded towns of the country of Wales, which were created from the period of the Norman conquest in the late 11th century to the end of the period of town plantation in the early 14th century and, more specifically, the towns founded by King Edward I of England (1272-1307) in the late 13th century. There is relatively little original documentation as to the creation or the original form of these towns. They have suffered a lot of damage through the ages and have been depopulated a great deal in many cases. Therefore, relatively little is left of the buildings and allotments from the first centuries of their existence. But the outline forms and street plans generally appear to have remained pretty much the same until the time they were first drawn in plans, and even up to the present day. (pars.1.1, 1.2, 1.7)
Colonisation is the keyword with respect to the towns that were founded in Wales. Shortly after the Normans invaded England in 1066, they also conquered Wales. As in England, the Normans founded manors and built castles, often with new towns at their gates. The difference is that in England there already had been many towns, whereas in Wales there were only very few, so new ones were created. (par.1.1.1) The period from about the middle to the end of the 12th century brought success for the native Welsh rulers, who managed to reconquer large parts of their country, particularly in the north and west, including the towns the Anglo-Normans had founded. (par.1.1.2) Under King Henry III (1216-1272) the Anglo-Norman policy of town foundation, as well as deliberate town expansion and fortification, was re-vitalised especially in the west and south, in a process of reconquest. (par.1.1.3) Eventually, northern Wales was reconquered by King Edward I in two military expeditions, in 1276-77 and 1282-83, in reaction to rebellions led by the Welsh Prince Llewelyn ap Gruffydd and his brother Dafydd. Linked to these expeditions, Edward founded nine new towns that were sited at the gates of newly built or newly conquered castles. Two more new towns were founded in northern Wales under Edward I without any military motives; these towns only served economic motives, as market centres. That is not to say that the castle towns did not serve economic motives as well: they were regional market centres and some of them became fairly successful in an economic sense, but they were planned primarily as service-settlements for the castles. (pars.1.4) There were also towns founded by Welsh lords, probably largely after the Anglo-Norman example, but these were relatively rare. The main motive for them must generally have been to generate more income from the lordly domains, by way of rents, taxes and tolls. (par.1.1.2)
The earlier Anglo-Norman towns show a wide variety in their plan forms. (par.1.2) The Edwardian towns that were founded primarily with military motives were often sited on, or right next to, locations that were effectively defendable. Their sites were determined by the strategic quality of the location rather than by the question of economic viability or suitability to the spatial layout of a new town. (par.1.8.1) This had its effect, of course, on the form of the towns, which show a great variation, despite the fact that the Edwardian towns were all founded in the same period and by the same founder. The shape of the landscape at the sites of the new foundations appears to have had much influence on the forms of the town plans. (pars.1.8.2-1.8.2.1) Among the Edwardian towns, solely Caerwys and Newborough are more or less similar, both consisting of a simple cross of streets. (pars.1.7.9, 1.7.11) Only the most important towns with strategic importance were given town walls; just six of the eleven Edwardian towns were provided with them.  (pars.1.8.3.1, 1.7) Apart from Bere, the original plan of which is unknown, the plans of the Edwardian towns show clear signs of planning, although their overall forms may be quite irregular in some cases.  (pars.1.8.2, 1.7)
Many of the towns in Wales were quite small, some of them counting only about a dozen taxpayers. These settlements may have been small or they may have shrunk to nothingness, but originally they were intended to take on urban functions and to serve as real centres with a significant importance relative to their surroundings, in an economic as well as an administrative sense. Many towns suffered from military and economic crises in the 14th and 15th centuries and some of them were completely abandoned consequently. (pars.1.7, 1.10) But, all in all the colonisation was quite successful, and by 1300 Wales was almost as urbanised a country as England. Less than one-fifth of the urban dwellers, however, were indigenous Welsh by that time, as most of the settlers had been deliberately attracted from England and some even from continental Europe. But the Welsh share would grow considerably in the following centuries. At present, the most important urban centres of Wales are still largely towns that were newly created in the 12th and 13th centuries. (pars.1.7, 1.10)

This essay is the second preliminary version of a paper that I intend to publish as an article in an architectural-historical journal or a relevant collection of papers.
This article is about the urban project of the ‘Esposizione Universale di Roma’ (also known as EUR or E42), the ‘city’ that was created to stage the World’s fair of 1942 in Rome under the fascist regime of dictator Benito Mussolini. (fig.1) Much has already been written about it, in particular about its architectural style, but I believe that I can contribute some new ideas as to its original urbanistic design. I have three new hypotheses, which are interconneted and rather speculative in character. The first is that the whole layout was oriented on Mussolini’s residence. The second is that it was also oriented on Tunis or the ancient city of Carthage. And the third is that the whole project for the universal exposition was secretly meant for the (symbolical) honouring of the ‘Duce’ and his imperial ambitions, and that under the guise of peaceful international cooperation it was in a sense a trap for the international community to implicitly contribute to these imperial ambitions.
Unfortunately, I am not able to substantiate my arguments with hard evidence, but I wil try to make them plausible by circumstantial evidence and comparison. If there is any truth in my ideas, they demonstrate that the plan for E42 was even more megalomanic than it already appeared to be and that the aspect of personality cult of the leader was even stronger than it already seemed.

This essay is a first preliminary version of a paper that I intend to publish as an article in an architectural-historical journal or a relevant collection of papers.
This paper is about the urban project of the ‘Esposizione Universale di Roma’ (also known as EUR or E42), the ‘city’ that was created to stage the World’s fair of 1942 in Rome under the fascist regime of dictator Benito Mussolini. Much has already been written about it, in particular about its architectural style, but I believe that I can contribute some new ideas as to its original urbanistic design. I have three new hypotheses, which are interconneted and rather speculative in character. The first is that the whole layout was oriented on Mussolini’s residence. The second is that it was also oriented on Tunis or the ancient city of Carthage. And the third is that the whole project for the universal exposition was secretly meant for the (symbolical) honouring of the ‘Duce’ and his imperial ambitions, and that under the guise of peaceful international cooperation it was in a sense a trap for the international community to implicitly contribute to these imperial ambitions.
Unfortunately, I am not able to substantiate my arguments with hard evidence, but I wil try to make them plausible by circumstantial evidence and comparison. If there is any truth in my ideas, they demonstrate that the plan for E42 was even more megalomanic than it already appeared to be and that the aspect of personality cult of the leader was even stronger than it already seemed.