Is the Ippodameion system still relevant? by WSA

1 Â

Nikolaos Retiniotis

Is the Ippodameion system still relevant?

How the ancient Greek cities had affected the modern western urban design, focusing on the works of Le Corbusier.

2 Â

Is the Ippodameion system still relevant?

How the ancient Greek cities had affected the modern western urban design, focusing on the works of Le Corbusier.

Nikolaos Retiniotis WSA_V

A dissertation submitted in partial fulfilment of the degree of March, 2010

Abstract The literature review distinguishes the abstract basis behind the developed principles of the Ippodameion system over the centuries and reveals in a critical aspect that they might be worldwide.

My research started with investigating the historical background of urban design in ancient Greece. The need of a settlement guided people in a search of a place that would be profitable in natural resources and will provide them a certain amount of security against the climatic changes, and the invasions by other neighboring tribes. Therefore the search of a location created the first rule in structuring a city. The location should be wealthy in natural sources and naturally protected. Factors that the Roman Empire adopted later on, in order to build more secure cities in order to protect their empire. Topography obtains, the primary principles in order to start a vigorous architecturally city, and mostly these principles express this idea universally.

The next phase of the research was to extend these vital rules to the religious theory and notice the effect that had on architecture. Can location, religion and architecture be related as metaphorical inspiration? Is it possible to apply the religious’ idealistic views to architectural materialistic design functionalities?

The references were made regarding the Polytheistic system and their subdivisions of ancient Greece and how they affected architecture and the urban design. That led to the first “humble” steps towards a more integrated model of a style and of architecture.

The third stage is structured based on these two crucial queries: Can politics manipulate architecture? If yes, how could this be stopped? At this point we notice that people’s interest turns rapidly on claiming more earnings in every political system. How all these social factors transformed the city about that time (500-300 B.C.)? How the lifestyle of ancient Greek democratic cities formed the city?

That was a crucial factor that gave birth to Democracy and transformed the structure of a city. Through that political evolution cities are responding to a number

5 Â of public key buildings such as Acropolis, Agora etc. What other social factors and culture factors affected the first ideas in designing a Democratic city? They give the starting point of the design of the city. By identifying their functionality and their use we find their true position in the urban design, which they drive it, into another level.

6 Â

Acknowledgements This dissertation would not be able to reach its final destination if there was not my tutor Jacob Hotz, who with his support and experience gave me the possibility to finish this piece of research. I would like also to thank Marga Buzar for the amount of the information, she provided me on the subject, the Architect and Professor of the Greek University of Athens Mr. Manolis Korres and the people who translated parts of my Bibliography Mr. Nikolaos Katsaros, Mr Costantinos Adamakis, Mr Edward Wainwright and Miss Vassia Retinioti.

Nikolaos Retiniotis, Cardiff, December 2009

List of figures •

Cover by the author

•

Fig.3.01 “Orphico system” by the author

•

Fig.3.02 “The Pan-Hellenic axis” by the author

•

Fig.5.01 “Zones Division” by the author

•

Fig.5.02 – Fig. 5.03 “Tetraktyos analogies, Pythagoreian School of sciences” by the author

•

Fig.5.04 “Sacred routes” by the author

•

Fig.5.05 “Housing” by the author

•

Fig.5.06 “Priene” by the author

•

Fig.5.07 “Kassopi” by the author

•

Fig.5.08 “Site choice” by the author

•

Fig.5.09 “Flat part of site location” by the author

•

Fig.5.10 “Location of Agora in the centre” by the author

•

Fig.5.11 “Main street (east to west) passing next to the Agora” by the author

•

Fig.5.12 “City plan designed on the proportions of agora” by the author

•

Fig.5.13 “Public buildings in the centre” by the author

•

Fig.5.14 “Arrangement of the three zones” by the author

•

Fig.5.14 “Final arrangement on the plan emphasizing on the Agora” by the author

•

Fig. 5.15 “Agora, Prytaneion and Vouleftirion” by the author

•

Fig.5.16 “Prene” by the author

•

Fig.5.18 “Priene” by the author

•

Fig.5.19 “Priene” by the author

•

Fig.6.01

“Manhattan

island,

city

plan

1807”

taken

from:

http-

_www.esperdy.net_wp-content_uploads_2009_04_nyc-grid-1811.jpg •

Fig. 6.02 “Radiant city 3 zones” reproduced by the author. Originally taken from: Hall Peter, Cities of tommorrow, (Massachussetts: Blackwell publishers Ltd: 1996, first printed: 1988) P. 208

•

Fig. 6.03 “Radiant City, all sectors together” ” reproduced by the author. Originally taken from: Hall Peter, Cities of tommorrow, (Massachussetts: Blackwell publishers Ltd: 1996, first printed: 1988) P. 208

•

Fig. 6.04 “Housing pattern” reproduced by the author. Originally taken from: http://images.google.co.uk/imgres?imgurl=http://www.uky.edu/Classes/PS/776/ Projects/Lecorbusier/lecorb5.GIF&imgrefurl=http://www.uky.edu/Classes/PS/77 6/Projects/Lecorbusier/lecorbusier.html&usg=__KWwewGSlzB4XozBK8r9fRVQ4ms=&h=269&w=402&sz=33&hl=en&start=18&um=1&tbnid=Dj2f6xgvJE2stM :&tbnh=83&tbnw=124&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dradiant%2Bcity%2Ble%2Bcorb usier%2Bplan%26hl%3Den%26client%3Dfirefox-a%26rls%3Dorg.mozilla:enUS:official%26sa%3DG%26um%3D1

•

Fig. 6.05 “Priene by Pytheos” by the author.

•

Fig. 6.06 “Radiant city by Le Corbusier” reproduced by the author. Originally taken from: Hall Peter, Cities of tommorrow, (Massachussetts: Blackwell publishers Ltd: 1996, first printed: 1988) P. 208

•

Fig. 6.07 “Brasilia by Niemeyer” reproduced by the author. Originally taken from: http-_www.kgi.ruhr-uni-bochum.de_projekte_rub_expo_k4_brasilia.jpg

•

Fig. 6.08 “Priene housing” by the author.

•

Fig. 6.09 “Radiant city-housing” reproduced by the author. Originally taken from: http://images.google.co.uk/imgres?imgurl=http://www.uky.edu/Classes/PS/776/ Projects/Lecorbusier/lecorb5.GIF&imgrefurl=http://www.uky.edu/Classes/PS/77 6/Projects/Lecorbusier/lecorbusier.html&usg=__KWwewGSlzB4XozBK8r9fRVQ4ms=&h=269&w=402&sz=33&hl=en&start=18&um=1&tbnid=Dj2f6xgvJE2stM :&tbnh=83&tbnw=124&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dradiant%2Bcity%2Ble%2Bcorb usier%2Bplan%26hl%3Den%26client%3Dfirefox-a%26rls%3Dorg.mozilla:enUS:official%26sa%3DG%26um%3D1

•

Fig. 6.10 “Brasilia-housing” Originaly taken from: http_www.superbrasilia.com_aquarela_aq_maquete_a.jpg

•

Fig.

6.11

“Radiant

city

public

sector”

Originally

taken

from:

http://images.google.co.uk/imgres?imgurl=http://www.uky.edu/Classes/PS/776/ Projects/Lecorbusier/lecorb5.GIF&imgrefurl=http://www.uky.edu/Classes/PS/77 6/Projects/Lecorbusier/lecorbusier.html&usg=__KWwewGSlzB4XozBK8r9fRVQ4ms=&h=269&w=402&sz=33&hl=en&start=18&um=1&tbnid=Dj2f6xgvJE2stM :&tbnh=83&tbnw=124&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dradiant%2Bcity%2Ble%2Bcorb usier%2Bplan%26hl%3Den%26client%3Dfirefox-a%26rls%3Dorg.mozilla:enUS:official%26sa%3DG%26um%3D1

•

Fig.

6.12

“Brasilia

public

sector”

Originally

taken

from:

http://images.google.co.uk/imgres?imgurl=http://downtowncreator.files.wordpre ss.com/2008/07/brasilia-21-04-2008.jpg&imgrefurl=http://downtowncreator.net/2008/07/31/brasilia-theevolution/&usg=__hyzlT6vklCEDXr6VsJoJ27oG0ro=&h=1772&w=2598&sz=20 37&hl=en&start=2&um=1&tbnid=dwPpOF0JHj_cDM:&tbnh=102&tbnw=150&pr ev=/images%3Fq%3Dbrasilia%2Bhousing%26hl%3Den%26client%3Dfirefoxa%26channel%3Ds%26rls%3Dorg.mozilla:enUS:official%26sa%3DG%26um%3D1

1. Introduction

1.1 Aim

“The Ippodameion system.”

Through an analysis of the Ippodameion system and its own principles we are able to distinguish the continuation of a “legacy” of design into the contemporary architecture and urban design through the works of various modern architects such us Le Corbusier and Oscar Niemeyer.

The Ippodameion system is a grid-based patterning planning system following the Pythagorean principles of geometry. The plan layout is not so much important because it could be circular because of its centralized arrangement. The important is the overall harmony and especially the scenographic-theatrical feeling it gives you while walking through the plots of land. Most importantly it is a well thought urban plan because it studies the political organization and the social system of its era, which its whole arrangement is based on the last two factors.

This dissertation concentrates on the primary connections between the political, the religious and principal design factors that formed the urban design in ancient Greece, how these factors and specifically how the Ippodameion system have been applied or transformed into contemporary global urban design. However we will notice that the people who set up the rules for a "perfect" city were not profound sensual architects with huge prestige and egos of their time, but simple people who saw the city as a living organism defined by the people who give movement and life to the whole.

My attempt is not an exhaustive explanation of Aristotle’s, Plato’s and Ippodamos’s thoughts but an explanation, that through these thoughts we can offer a key to understanding the break of the sensibility of these philosophers towards the whole and by that I mean the ones that give “arteries and soul” to the structure of the city.

This does not only reflect ancient Greece and if the found is still within the past

and contemporary urban design. Findings might be found at many places around the world but not everywhere at all. Other rules and concept of urban design like the Garden city by Ebenezer Howard could be found around the world as well. Most cities where we find these principles are based on Roman settlements at earlier time. The Romans took quite some principles from ancient Greek architecture but never in this refined and oligarchic way. During the course of this dissertation we will explore the rules of the Ippodameion system and investigate them and their application in the modern world and if they could be applied for future design attitudes. This will help us understand the needs of a city for specific urban design based on those principles and to act as a valuable source from which we can use for future designer’s benefit.

1.2

Structure

The subject we are dealing with is a source of urban design that started officially in 451 B.C. The Ippodameion system could be applied, following one possible route and that is the chronological route. I found out that a timeline can explain the factors of the different results on urbanism in ancient Greece for the centuries and moving into the modern world, would be the most appropriate in order for the reader to comprehend the reasons and the causes, the geometry, the political factors and the society’s factors that were behind the Ippodameion system.

The year 451 B.C saw the first city built under Ippodamos’s innovative design. What happened that year? Why was that year was such a dramatic development in urban design? Why after 451 B.C did Greece establish an official urban design school? How had the Ippodameion system transferred through the centuries? These questions and more led me to undertake an extensive investigation into the reasons behind the Ippodameion urban design.

The research starts at a very early age, when people were still living in tribes and in search for the perfect location in order to establish a permanent place to live. The first chapter explains what the methodologies are in choosing a place to live, how this location was able to create a religious model (1300 B.C. Orphico system) and finally play a crucial role on urban design in ancient Greece. Religion is changing over the years so the design as well. The rules that have been created,

on the purpose of finding a location, in order to establish a “healthy” city have not changed over the years. Roman empire used them, (which had a completely different way of designing cities) and we will see that these rules are still crucial factors.

The next stage is dedicated to the necessity of a political system. That political system was Democracy and it was established in 700 B.C. There were specific buildings that established the spirit of Democracy and made a tremendous difference from the rest of the oligarchic city-states in ancient Greece. Furthermore Democracy allowed people to expand and experiment new ways of exploring physics and arts. The Ippodameion system was an outcome of Democracy and at this stage we will be critically examining the principles behind it.

Finally I will observe how it survived through the centuries and especially after the medieval era when different needs were created and hence for a completely different approach on urban design.

1.3

Methodology

The Ippodameion system is mostly known for its grid arrangement, but what did it make it so important? That led me to find the concepts behind it, categorize the rules and try to come across with connections between past and the contemporary.

Suggesting secondary materials of research could complete the above method. It is a subject that focuses on the antiquity of Greece. In order to achieve that, I was led on the use of a literature review. The literature review started by describing the “Ippodameion system”.

In science, we always look for the reasons behind that caused a phenomenon or a trend. So the next step was to research on some potential case studies, in order to find the similarities or even better the common rules behind the Ippodameion structure of a city. This led me to investigate on Ippodamos’s personal life. Who was he, what did he do, what were his beliefs on philosophical matters, but most importantly which cities had been designed by him.

These were my criteria in order to choose carefully and appropriately my case studies, according to the cities he designed or the ones based on his rules after his death (around 400 B.C.). The cities were: Piraeus, Milletus and Priene.

There were not so many sources available in Greek or in English. Most of the sources were written in French or in German, which I managed to translate with the help of friends, family and professional translators. The above would not be able to be done without the discussion with experts on the subject as well. People that they are specialized on ancient Greek architecture suggested me a bibliography in order to integrate my case studies. These people are recognized archaeologist and architects working as professors.

The second part of the dissertation is based on the strategy I mentioned above. In order to find the connections between the past and the contemporary or if it was transformed during the years (Medieval ages, Renaissance etc.). The research started by looking on the contemporary design of Milton Keynes, but the sources were not enough. So two case studies took place at this point. One was on “The radiant city” by Le Corbusier and the other one on Brasilia by Oscar Niemeyer and Lucio Costa. On the subject of Brasilia the bibliography is poor because there are not so many books written in English. Most of them were written in Portuguese.

These case studies will show as the advantages and the disadvantages of the Ippodamos’s principles. Through them we will try to observe if it can be still applied and under which conditions. A list of facts and principles will be placed at the end of every subchapter and a final conclusion will be included regarding the existence of the Ippodameion system in modern societies.

2. A literature review on the origins of ancient Greek urban planning and how it has influenced the western world. “…tree is a leaf, and leaf is a city, and city is a house, a tree is a tree, but, it is also a huge leaf, a leaf is a leaf, but, it is also a tiny tree, a city is not a city, unless it is also a huge house, a house is a house only of it is also a tiny city.” Aldo Van Eyck1 This literature review will analyze the conceptual basis behind the Ippodameion system based on a research that have been done. The importance of choosing a site to build the city, the influence of the religion, the importance of the politics and trying to explain that these were the key factors that formed an ancient Greek city and later on, its influence on the western world. Greeks were living in a land that was always protected. That’s why Greece is not a stop but a passage. The small valleys are enclosed by unapproachable mountains sometimes with no passages, it is between these mountains that small societies were created. In turn these societies led the way to the formation of the first Greek cities-states. The mountains formed the natural boundaries of these territories, which almost always included a port situated some distance away from the main city. The sea provided the only means of communication and trade links with the outside world. However the strategy behind this distance was to protect the citystate from invading pirates. This provided the necessary security for the city-states to flourish. A crucial topic that has fascinated many scientists and surveyors, is the secret knowledge and philosophy that govers the architecture of ancient Greeks. Urban design of ancient Greece created two schools of thought: 1) an anthropocentric manner of design and 2) and as a network2. The first school of thought believes it was based on the housing of people and the second one believes the Acropolis and the Agora formed a city. The Agora is considered the most important element in any city around the world. It has a different explanation but the same meaning. In the renaissance era, Agora was renamed Piazza. Archaeologists have

1 Eyck Aldo van, Tr. Gregory Ball, Works, (Basel: Boston: Birkhäuser Verlag: 1999) 2 Μπαλτογιάννης, Γεώργιος Β. (Baltogiannis, Georgios V.), Ιερή αρχιτεκτονική - Χθόνια

considered Ippodamos as the “Father of the cities”. Some historians considered him as the one who created the gridiron, but actually he was the one who divided the cities because the gridiron already existed since 5000 B.C.3 The use of the gridiron combined with the Agora and the geography of the terrain creates the “perfect” city. Many urban designers are still using Ippodamos’s system and specifically in modern cities like Manhattan. The question arising here is: What was so vital on that pattern design in terms of sustainability, geography, materiality and sociology? In the book “History of urban form”, A.E.J. Morris tries to answer the importance of the social factor.4 The chapter on the urban form of cities and towns on the ancient Greek territory could be summarised as a historical analysis of the “Faces” (architrcts, philosophers etc.) that shaped the cities and not about the designs itself. Based on faces, it is logical to follow a route explaining the social levels and how all these different categories were combined in the city and able to create a “tremendous product” so that they can be able to start developing other areas like arts and science. In “History of urban form”, A.E.J. Morris mentions the contribution to the modern world, summarized into two main points: 1) “The colonizing movement, whereby urban growth pressures were contained by sending out emigrant expeditionary parties to found new cities in other parts of Mediterranean”.5 2) “Contemporary design. Acropolis as the religious centre, Agora as the multipurpose everyday place.” These two urban components should be examined separately to view the importance they have on building a city”.6

“Divine Architecture”, specifically, focus on the construction of divine temples and other spiritual buildings, showing how to obey in some invisible laws of specific mystical purpose that only the priests and the architects were acknowledged.7

3 Roland Martin, L'Urbanisme dans la Grèce antique ( fr. Tr., The Urban design in

ancient Greece), (Paris: Picard: 1956, 1st Edition) P. 10-‐122

4 Morris, A. E. J. (Anthony Edwin James), History of urban form: prehistory to the

Renaissance, (London: George Godwin: 1972) P. 23-‐31

5 Morris, A. E. J. (Anthony Edwin James), History of urban form: prehistory to

the Renaissance, (London: George Godwin: 1972) P. 44 6 Μπαλτογιάννης, Γεώργιος Β. (Baltogiannis, Georgios V.), Ιερή αρχιτεκτονική - Χθόνια

The theme of “Divine Architecture” that examines the shape, the functional rhythm, the constructional materials, the location and the orientation of every temple as well as the geometrical relation with other crucial divine structures. This could be interpreted as a manifestation of a secret art, a code that was typed in a philosophical, religious and political way, on the Greek-known region of 1300-400 B.C. The theme of the book is based on the geographic location and the explanation of “why” they were placed in such a way in order to create congruent geographic triangles with same sides in distance and in angles. Despite the temples having played a very sophisticated and crucial role in the design of an ancient Greek city by deciding its location and geometrical relation with the Agora and the rest of the residential area, this book doesn’t give much information about that connection. The book instead focuses on how astrology and astronomy have effected their position on the map of the known world of that period. Whereas the “History of the house” covers a wide period, exploring the design and the structure of the city through the private space, which is extended from 9000 B.C. and reaches the beginning of the medieval west and the first cities of the Byzantine Empire. The progressive evolution of the cities in meaningful areas of the south-east Mediterranean Sea and most importantly in the area of Greece, continues into the Roman Empire. The last chapter is dedicated to the cities of the first three centuries of the Byzantine Empire (330 A.D. – 1453 A.D.).8 The “History of the house” expresses its faith in the city and the culture of the nation by revealing a connecting ring which combines the different nations and especially the Greek one, during 3000 B.C. until 600 A.C. A characteristic example is the investigation into the city of Priene, which makes an analytical review from scratch. Focusing on the existing geographic, climate,

7 Μπαλτογιάννης, Γεώργιος Β. (Baltogiannis, Georgios V.), Ιερή αρχιτεκτονική - Χθόνια

και ουράνια (Ieri arhitektoniki-Chthonia kai ourania, fr. Tr., “Divine Architecture – Underground Gods and Sky Gods”), (Αθήνα (Athens): Έσοπτρον (Esoptron): 2002) P. 20-‐67 8 Wolfram Hoepfner, Tr. Τσιριγκάκης (Tsirigakis), Ιστορία της κατοικίας 5000 π.Χ. – 500 μ.Χ. (Istoria tis katikias 5000 B.C.-500 A.D., fr. Tr., “The history of the house from 5000 B.C-500 A.D.), (Θεσσαλονίκη (Thessaloniki): University Studio Press: 2005) P. 112-‐201

financial, political and social aspects, the author Wolfram Hoepfner explains all the possibilities in designing a city amazingly accurate in both terms, sustainable and functional, which the design is based on the most important city plan called Ippodameion. Most of the surveyors among designers and planners were confused on analyzing the true purpose of a city. Their beliefs were summarized in two philosophies: seeing the city as a home or as a network.9 Most of the ancient Greek cities were built, based on the Ippodameion system and Wolfram Hoepfner begins from the structure and the concepts behind it.10 His research concludes to explain that the Ippodameion system is an absolute anthropocentric design based and thoroughly related on the housing needs of that age. In Leonardo Benevolo’s investigation “The history of the city” there is extended research into the structure of the cities since man started forming tribes and was able to create either nomadic or permanent settlements.11 The theme of the book is to analyze a wide chronological period separately for its geographical subdivision of the known world of that age. Leonardo Benevolo spent around 130 pages examining the methods on designing an Ancient Greek city since the Bronze Age, explaining how the major warrior families created the Acropolis and how the city was arranged around the Acropolis. The Acropolis failure (on troubled times during invasions from neighboring tribes) based on its location and later the addition of the Agora and the Ekklisiastirion etc.12 The fact is that the cities started being developed and reached the glorious and final form with the use of the Ippodameion system. When comparing Leonardo Benevolo to Wolfram Hoepfner, Benevolo is analyzing a typical ancient Greek city in a more political and skeptical way. Benevolo does not touch on the arguments of construction or sustainability. Neither does he

9 Wolfram Hoepfner, Tr. Τσιριγκάκης (Tsirigakis), Ιστορία της κατοικίας 5000 π.Χ. –

500 μ.Χ. (Istoria tis katikias 5000 B.C.-500 A.D., fr. Tr., “The history of the house from 5000 B.C-500 A.D.), (Θεσσαλονίκη (Thessaloniki): University Studio Press: 2005) P. 114-‐118 10 Wolfram Hoepfner, Tr. Τσιριγκάκης (Tsirigakis), Ιστορία της κατοικίας 5000 π.Χ. – 500 μ.Χ. (Istoria tis katikias 5000 B.C.-500 A.D., fr. Tr., “The history of the house from 5000 B.C-500 A.D.), (Θεσσαλονίκη (Thessaloniki): University Studio Press: 2005) P.114-‐118 11 Edmund N. Bacon, Design of cities, (New York: Penguin Books: 1976) P. 37-‐45 12 Edmund N. Bacon, Design of cities, (New York: Penguin Books: 1976) P. 37-‐45

focuses on the analogies and the dimensions of the city, but emphasizes on the political system and how this transformed the city, based on the most important buildings (Agora, Acropolis etc.) and not also on the residential sector. On the other hand, Edmund N. Bacon in his “Design of the cities” he is making an investigation into the development of the cities through the ancient Greek times and how they evolved over the Roman Empire and into their final form.13 Like Leonardo Benevolo, Edmund N. Bacon focuses on the Agora and the Acropolis. He conducts a study on how the Athenian Agora was developed over the years, the changes on the roots-roads (circulation, entrance etc.) that connected the public areas with the residential area of the city and how they affected the Ippodameion system14. His case studies are integrated by exploring three characteristic cities of the Hellenistic period. Miletus, Camiros and Delos. Miletus (400 B.C.) was the first city to be designed following the rules of the great city planner Ippodamos (hence Ippodameion system) and it is considered one of the most complete cities of its age, where as Camiros and Delos did not follow the Ippodameion system. Even though these three cities are completely different between them, Edmund N. Bacon proves with a charismatic way that the starting point to build a Greek city was the Agora, which is something that has been overruled by most of the cities that have been designed according to the Ippodameion system. Bernard Rudofsky comes to empower Edmund N. Bacon’s argument on how cities were built around a building of great importance (for ancient Greece, the Agora)15. Bernard Rudofsky in his book “Architecture without architects” is, traveling around the world with his camera and taking photos of interesting dwellings. At the same time he is creating a photo documentary of buildings and cities that prove that some cities have been built following an important structure of its era without architects or planners just simple people without any prestige. For example the pre-Columbian Mexico City looked much like a smaller version of Venice. Venice was built based on a central plaza (very similar to the Greek Agora) although the

13 Edmund N. Bacon, Design of cities, (New York: Penguin Books: 1976) 14 Leonardo Benevolo, The history of the city, (London: Solar Press: 1980) 15 Rudofsky Bernard, Architecture without architects : a short introduction to non-

pedigreed architecture, (New York : Doubleday: 1964)

houses were facing the waterfront16. Even though the pre- Columbian Mexico city has disappeared, this city proves that the people (the so-called “mob”) created their own settlement patterns, and it is not just one because its region has different needs from another one. So the question is: On how many settlement patterns the Greek city could be applied and does the Ippodameion system still apply on modern cities? Bernard Rudofski talks about cities that they had been built without an architect. What are the concepts behid in order to build that a city? Are these concepts appropriate to be used in the contemporary architecture and urban design? Peter Eisenman in his dissertation in 1963 "The formal basis of modern architecture" goes through a journey explaining the main concepts that formed modern architecture. In "The formal basis of modern architecture" he includes concepts and strategies on design through architects that are considered founders of modern architecture like Palladio17. In order to keep his dissertation in one book and not in several, Peter Eisenman decided to focus on a case study. This case study was based on four contemporary main architects. Le Corbusier, Alvar Aalto, Frank Lloyd Wright and Guisepe Terragni. Every time we want to reach a result we need to set some strategy and face the potential problems that may occur during the research. Like previously I am trying to set some questions so that the dissertation can have a clear target. Clear and detailed questions will lead to the answer on the question mentioned before. In order to do that, I suggest the exploration (through multiple case studies) of an ancient Greek city through the Classical Age because in the classical (Hellenistic era) is where the Ippodameion system was applied, and on in the modern world. The criteria by which to choose that city would be a city designed and based on the Ippodameion system. Such a city could be Priene. That case study might solve some questions in areas that are very crucial to decide that whether the Ippodameion pattern is successful or not. To reach that point we need to include all the possible criticism (social, geographical, political,

16 Rudofsky Bernard, Architecture without architects : a short introduction to non-

pedigreed architecture, (New York : Doubleday: 1964)

17 Eisenman Peter, The Formal Basis of Modern Architecture: Dissertation 1963,

(Baden, Switzerland: Lars Muller: 2006)

20 Â

functional, sustainability, etc.) and based on this factor we will be able to understand if that model has survived or even more, if it has formed the foundations of modern citiesâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; design.

3. The religious model. 3.1 Introduction

This chapter will focus on the primitive reasons of building a city. Before we reach the point were people were able to design a city there were some primer stages to overcome. This chapter will deal with the importance of the choice of a site and the influence that religion had on the urban design and in architecture in ancient Greece.

Christopher Alexander in his book "A new theory of urban design" characterizes cities as autonomous wholes that have achieved their completion and their final form in a mystical yet beautiful manor.18 It is because it had to be that way. Also I cannot find a person that would deny the fact that this final form of the autonomous whole governed governs and will govern cities continuation to the centuries. It is very obvious if we consider the city as a living organism that affects what is inside "her", outside "her" and around "her". It is definitely a value that exists in every single city and at a specific level we are able to observe the clues once represented, still represents it. At least at a certain point. We are only sure for one factor, everything is a procedure and a process. Nothing ever stops, every living organism is in a permanent movement, change, reformation and we are trying to find the proof of the driver on that movement and evolution. We might not possess every detail of each city (for now) but in a very simple manner we are able to recognize the causes of the city's movement throughout time and “her” evolution, regardless if the city was designed by one architect (or more) or it was built based on an element (i.e. a church or on a symbolism). These two scenarios are the two possible ones, which have a starting point, followed by this driver and which leads us to the final result. This will appear through an investigation of the “Ippodameion system” and its own rules, how and where these rules where applied and, on which situations and by the end we will be able to identify if it is part of the modern urban world and if it can still be applied or already had been applied.

In order to build a good house we need to build on good foundations. When people

18 Christopher Alexander, Hajo Neis, Artemis Anninou, Ingrid King, A new theory of

urban design, (New York: Oxford University Press: 1987) P.13-‐19

took their first steps on this planet, they were already acknowledged of their existence amongst others. Each one of us in order to survive has certain needs. These needs are based only on the survival of its being. So there are three basic needs in order to stay alive and these are: nourishment, shelter and protective clothing. The need for shelter led man to create buildings and later on, cities. A person is unable to provide for all these needs at once, and that inability was the reason humans created societies and later on cities. So as we can see, people needed space and that space was determined from the topology, topography and the location that the tribe chose to establish its society.

3.2 Topography

3000 B.C. Man was looking for shelter in places that there were rich in natural resources and in temperate climates. This location should have natural properties such us: a mild climate and access to water. The region should be an open flat place in order to transport the materials and build their shelters easier.19 Based on those archetypes, ancient Greeks lived in a location that had an extra significant advantage. Every flat land in Greece is naturally covered and protected by mountains that form a difficult passage to the valley. People started building cities on these lands in order to avoid invasions by the neighboring enemies. Greece is a link between Asia, Africa and Europe via the Mediterranean Sea. Small valleys were formed in between the mountains, so slowly and gradually people created societies and later on cities-states. Location is the most important factor in order to build a city. So Greeks could think, dream and create philosophy and physics. They could exchange goods and thoughts with the rest of the known civilized world of that time via the sea and live a comfortable life because they had guaranteed their safety for them and their families. In the same way we can observe that all nations have integrated their characteristics, religion and governing system based on their nature. Ancient Greeks learnt from their natural surroundings and they had taken advantage of nature in order to enlarge the possibilities of an easier life without wars.

19 Leon Battista Alberti, Tr. Cosino Bartoli, Tr.: James Leoni, Ten books on Architecture,

(London: Alec Tiranti LTD: 1995) P. 13-‐14

Summary points. The location should be: •

Rich in natural sources.

•

In a mild climate.

•

On an open flat place.

•

Naturally protected by mountains.

3.3 The Polytheistic system and how it affected Architecture.

1300 B.C.

Greece could not be a monotheistic (only one God) country because of its natural kingdom and without the need of a poet. In order to praise the beauty of their land ancient Greeks assigned a god to every element. There were gods, semi gods and even dryads just for a single river. Each river has its own brides etc. The polytheistic (multi-god) religion that was created played a crucial role in the psychology of the Greeks and influenced their architecture and urban design. In order to categorize all these gods, ancient Greeks needed to create a specific religious system. At the beginning it was called Orphico system (1300 B.C.) and had 3 basic levels. That religious system was the first model to decide the architecture of ancient Greece. (Top level) Sky's Gods traveling from the East. (Middle level) Revelation Gods that they had been born, deceased and finally incarnated. (Bottom level) Gods of the underground traveling from the North.20

Gods of the skies represented progression, prosperity, wealth, happiness and light in people's lives, bringing it from the East.21 That is why they were worshiped in Eastern locations where their temples were located (Fivos or Apollon was worshiped in Dilos, eastern island of the known ancient Greek world).

20 Μπαλτογιάννης, Γεώργιος Β. (Baltogiannis, Georgios V.), Ιερή αρχιτεκτονική -

There was however an unsolved problem in the Orphico system. The Gods of the underground like Hades (God of the dead) could not be placed in the north, whereas in the north there is an abundance of light as well. So a new and refreshed system came to repair that problem based on the old one.

Fig. 3.01 “Orphico System”

The Archaic system places the Gods of the underground to the West. So now, Apollo receives the darkness of the day from Hades's hands that he just finished his trip from the underworld that had as a starting point the west, and brings out

the light of the day where he will give it back to Hades after he finishes his journey that started from the East.22 This journey was repeated every day, reflecting the natural course of the sun. Light as east (location), life (living society), "good" and Darkness as west, death, and “bad" were the first two important rules that gave shape on the architecture and the urban design in ancient Greece.

This is how the temples of the Gods of the underground have been separated from the temples of the Gods of the skies. Gods of the underground where located to the west and Gods of the skies to the east so that the day's journey can be fully circled. Also the Gods of the skies where worshiped on the ground and the Gods of the underground under the ground.23

These symbolisms continued and placed the revelation Gods on location where the ground meets the underground. This resulted in their temples being built in caves. In order to distinguish the difference between these three divisions of the Gods, there had to be a symbolism.

That led to an architectural innovation. The Gods of the skies were given by the people the linear architecture, where the Gods of the underground the vaulting one. Finally the revelation Gods were given a mixed architecture that included both linear and vaulting.24

That gave birth to the first pan-Hellenic model of integrated axis design in the known ancient Greek world. Now Greece was united lying on an axis that was began from Dilos east, temple of Apollo the God of the sun and was finishing in Ahairontas west, a temple where you could meet your ancestors. Placed in the

22 Μπαλτογιάννης, Γεώργιος Β. (Baltogiannis, Georgios V.), Ιερή αρχιτεκτονική -

Χθόνια και ουράνια (Ieri arhitektoniki-Chthonia kai ourania, fr. Tr., “Divine Architecture – Underground Gods and Sky Gods”), (Αθήνα (Athens): Έσοπτρον (Esoptron): 2002) P. 42-‐55 23 Μπαλτογιάννης, Γεώργιος Β. (Baltogiannis, Georgios V.), Ιερή αρχιτεκτονική - Χθόνια και ουράνια (Ieri arhitektoniki-Chthonia kai ourania, fr. Tr., “Divine Architecture – Underground Gods and Sky Gods”), (Αθήνα (Athens): Έσοπτρον (Esoptron): 2002) P. 42-‐55 24 Μπαλτογιάννης, Γεώργιος Β. (Baltogiannis, Georgios V.), Ιερή αρχιτεκτονική - Χθόνια και ουράνια (Ieri arhitektoniki-Chthonia kai ourania, fr. Tr., “Divine Architecture – Underground Gods and Sky Gods”), (Αθήνα (Athens): Έσοπτρον (Esoptron): 2002) P.

42-‐55

middle of this axis was the Delfi Manteion which housed the oracle were ancient Greeks could discover factors affecting their distant future. This axis that was running from the east to the west we would notice that orientated the ancient Greek city-states. All the cities had to be orientated and that will be explained on chapter five. This axis was keeping Greece united in their traditions, ethics and played a crucial role on the daily psychology of ancient Greeks independently of their civil wars that they were taking place every year. Obviously that happened deliberately and people of that time were very aware of what they were designing and building. These are the first signs of modern concepts in the field of architecture whereas; ancient Greek sand their dialectic way of thinking had already comprehended the difference between utilitarian function and symbolic function.

Fig. 3.02 “The Pan-Hellenic axis”

Summary points. Religion’s influence on Architecture and Urban design of ancient Greece. : •

The whole land was considered sacred.

•

Greece’s topography created the Orphico system of religion.

•

Sky Gods were given the “linear architecture”

•

The location where Sky Gods should worshiped, was on the ground.

•

Sky Gods should be placed on the east.

•

The location where Underground Gods should worshiped was under the ground.

•

Underground Gods were given the “the vault architecture”

•

Underground Gods should be placed on the west.

•

Revelation Gods were given “the mixed architecture” (both linear and vault

architecture.) •

The location where Revelation Gods should worshiped was, where the ground meets the underground. Hence in caves.

•

That axis had multiple points were this points represented a temple.

•

In some occasions (like Athens-Acropolis) around that temple a city was formed.

4. The birth of the Democratic city. The citizen’s ethical evolution to the political consciousness gives shape and form to the city.

4.1 Introduction 1300 B.C. – 594 B.C. Still there was no specific rule on designing a city, neither a school that would teach urban design, but only a social, political and financial force imposed on the people with only one outcome, and that was the prosperity of the lives of the few powerful man who controlled the city. So only this class of people were able to form the progression of a city, in design and in society. In order to create more income they needed safe and correctly designed routes so that they can exchange their products in a safer and quicker way. Also they had to take care of their survival needs, so they built cisterns to collect water and defending walls. Despite these three starting points, the rest of the city was in complete chaos. This with a result the human masses gathered in dense and dirty alleys (streets). The importance of the political system that runs the city affects its design, or better a city is a mirror that reflects the politics that rule it.25

4.2 Acropolis What began to transform the image of the city was the ethical evolution of people and by ethical I mean a healthier and a more comfortable life.26 Gradually public buildings started being built and the first one was the Acropolis. Acropolis is derived from two words. “Acro” or else the edge and the “polis”, the city.27 So the edge of the city had to be located somewhere higher than the rest of the buildings. Most of the time that was on a hill and it accommodated a series of buildings and most importantly the temple of the guardian God - Goddess of the city.

Acropolis served as the last refuge for people to defend against the enemy. This happened mostly in democratic city-states because the concept of social care had been further developed. In other city-states like Sparta, which was an Oligarchic city, a structure like Acropolis did not exist or could not survive because it was

25 Roland Martin, L'Urbanisme dans la Grèce antique ( fr. Tr., The Urban design in

ancient Greece), (Paris: Picard: 1956, 1st Edition) P. 12-‐16

26 Roland Martin, L'Urbanisme dans la Grèce antique ( fr. Tr., The Urban design in

ancient Greece), (Paris: Picard: 1956, 1st Edition) P. 21-‐23

27 http://wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn?s=acropolis

prohibited by the monarchy ruling the city. Off course Acropolis at the beginning served only the protection of the strongest clan in the city.28 Even though, later on, in 340 B.C, Aristotle in his book “Politics” mentions that Acropolis was the last refuge point for the king, writings revealed that people were running under the protection of Acropolis's defending walls in order to save themselves in difficult situations, during times of war. Through the years Acropolis’s defending walls expanded and surrounded the city.29

Gradually the city was forming and its design was based on defense strategies. The true meaning of Acropolis was a symbolic one. Despite the usage of it as a place for temples, which we cannot deny it, because we can understand by the openness to the public, the location of Acropolis was completely strategic. On Parthenon there were two entrances one for the women (only the priestesses) who was the door at the back of the temple and for the men the door at the front of the temple.30 The real function of Parthenon was to observe any movements of the enemy armies in case of an attack and also to be the final refuge for the city.

Usually Acropolis was oriented on the east or in the west and it was not proposed to gather lots of worshipers.31 The worshipers could use the open shrine outside for this purpose where the altar was allocated. In the early years before 1300 B.C. Acropolis was constructed from local material (timber or stone) but later on the main material for the erection was marble.32

Summary points. Acropolis: •

Acropolis was placed on the highest location of the city.

28 Leonardo Benevolo, The history of the city, (London: Solar Press: 1980) P. 60-‐62 29 Roland Martin, L'Urbanisme dans la Grèce antique ( fr. Tr., The Urban design in

ancient Greece), (Paris: Picard: 1956, 1st Edition) P. 19-‐25

30 Μπαλτογιάννης, Γεώργιος Β. (Baltogiannis, Georgios V.), Ιερή αρχιτεκτονική -

Χθόνια και ουράνια (Ieri arhitektoniki-Chthonia kai ourania, fr. Tr., “Divine Architecture – Underground Gods and Sky Gods”), (Αθήνα (Athens): Έσοπτρον (Esoptron): 2002) P. 42-‐55 31 ΒΛΑΧΟΣ Σ. ΑΓΓΕΛΟΣ (Vlachos S. Angelos), Ο ΚΥΡΙΟΣ ΜΟΥ ΑΛΚΙΒΙΑΔΗΣ (O KYRIOS MOU ALKIVIADIS, fr. Tr. “MY MASTER ALKIVIADIS”), (ΑΘΗΝΑ (ATHENS): ΕΣΤΙΑ (ESTIA): 2004) P. 210-‐215 32 Leonardo Benevolo, The history of the city, (London: Solar Press: 1980) P. 76-‐83

•

The purpose of Acropolis was to observe and to be the last location in case of an invasion.

•

Acropolis was oriented to the east.

•

Usually within the walls of Acropolis there was a temple of the God-Goddess guardian of the city. It was not meant, to gather lots of worshipers.

4.3 The Common Hearth After the need of surviving from the neighbor enemy armies, there was finally time to start refining the life below the Acropolis. The public buildings did not stop their development just there. Next to the Acropolis was placed "The common hearth".33 An internal flame that had a symbolic meaning. It represented the city's spirit. It had to be always alight so that the people will see it all the time and understand that the city is alive and give strength to them in times that the city would be under siege. Small symbolisms sometimes can change the mood and the morale in humans mind, whereas in that particular situation "The common hearth" was believed to be as important as the city's guardian God. When local citizens were leaving the city they were ought to carry through their journey the common hearth in order to keep the city’s spirit alive in their minds.

Summary points. Common Hearth: •

A symbolic flame that represented the city’s spirit.

•

Usually placed next to in the Acropolis so that everybody could see it.

4.4 The Agora

Late 700 B.C. The most important place: The Agora. This was a place that had its gates open to everyone, independently of nationality and profession. Even slaves were represented. The Agora served as a meeting place that people could discuss the decision that had been taken, assert their rights, or even discuss what was said in

33 Leonardo Benevolo, The history of the city, (London: Solar Press: 1980) P. 65-‐69

private or religious areas.34

It was always allocated in the central zone of the city and always in the centre of the city. It served also as a market. Agora in a way was the consciousness of the city. It was a fairly open place surrounded by stoas (arcades).35 At this point we can see the most important concept of designing an ancient Greek city the theatre like design of the whole city. The city seemed like an endless theatre. Even the location of each city-state had it. As we said before, the choice of the location of the city where the mountains were surrounding the city, even that was giving an amphitheatrically shape to the whole. All the public buildings where designed in such a way so everybody can see and listen the speaker and everybody in the Agora could participate and not just be the spectator.36 The problem with the Agora was that it could not expand because it was in the centre of the city. It had to be always in the centre so that it can be easily accessible.

If the Agora was radiant and had a continuous flow, then it seems that the council of nobles had worked out their obligations properly. Later we will see why theoretically a space like agora, that feels is not changing much of the city’s fate but it was the major idea and element in designing a new city. Even two thousand five hundred years later where the Agora had been overtaken by the Piazzas in the renaissance years and by the shopping malls in the modern world, it is still a source of inspiration as it was for Le Corbusier’s radiant city. Another progressive thinking was the creation of theatron (theatre), which it was available to all social classes, where they could watch theatre plays. This was viewed as free education for everyone.

Summary points. Agora: •

A conversational space that had also markets.

•

Agora was open to everybody. Even slaves (in Democratic cities) had the right

34 ΒΛΑΧΟΣ Σ. ΑΓΓΕΛΟΣ (Vlachos S. Angelos), Ο ΚΥΡΙΟΣ ΜΟΥ ΑΛΚΙΒΙΑΔΗΣ (O KYRIOS

MOU ALKIVIADIS, fr. Tr. “MY MASTER ALKIVIADIS”), (ΑΘΗΝΑ (ATHENS): ΕΣΤΙΑ (ESTIA): 2004) P. 143-‐145 35 Edmund N. Bacon, Design of cities, (New York: Penguin Books: 1976) P. 32-‐37 36 ΒΛΑΧΟΣ Σ. ΑΓΓΕΛΟΣ (Vlachos S. Angelos), Ο ΚΥΡΙΟΣ ΜΟΥ ΑΛΚΙΒΙΑΔΗΣ (O KYRIOS MOU ALKIVIADIS, fr. Tr. “MY MASTER ALKIVIADIS”), (ΑΘΗΝΑ (ATHENS): ΕΣΤΙΑ (ESTIA): 2004) P. 143-‐145

to talk, and their word would be heard. •

Usually was amphitheatrically shaped, so that everybody could see the speaker and participate.

•

Usually was surrounded by Stoas (arcades).

•

The Agora was the “face” of the city. If the agora was happy the council of nobles had worked their obligation well.

4.5 Prytaneion (The council of higher officers) and the Vouleftirion (The council of nobles)

594 B.C. Next to "The common hearth" was the location of the Prytaneion. This building served as the living quarters of the higher-ranking officers who were responsible to keep alight "The common hearth",37 they were responsible for deciding the fate of the city. Their councils were taking place only ten times per year and no more than ten.

In 594 B.C. Solon the arch general of Athens introduced another public building for the services of the people. The Vouleftirion. In 594 B.C. we can officially state the genuine beginning of the democratic political system and the birth of the Democratic city. Moving further down was one of the most important public buildings. It was the "Ekklisia tou Dymou" or the Vouleftirion, where the councils of nobles were representatives to the Prytaneion.38 Their job was to transfer the requests and needs to their higher officers. The most important decisions were taken here and especially in financial matters, military aspects (declaration of war and generals elections). But how was this council of nobles elected? In democratic cities it was easy. All you had to do was to be over 30 years old and a citizen of the city. During the Pelloponesian wars, Athens’ population was four hundred thousand people. However only fifty thousand were truly Athenians, either slaves or servants formed the rest of the population.39

37 Leonardo Benevolo, The history of the city, (London: Solar Press: 1980) P. 83-‐88 38 Leonardo Benevolo, The history of the city, (London: Solar Press: 1980) P. 90-‐99

39 ΒΛΑΧΟΣ Σ. ΑΓΓΕΛΟΣ (Vlachos S. Angelos), Ο ΚΥΡΙΟΣ ΜΟΥ ΑΛΚΙΒΙΑΔΗΣ (O KYRIOS

MOU ALKIVIADIS, fr. Tr. “MY MASTER ALKIVIADIS”), (ΑΘΗΝΑ (ATHENS): ΕΣΤΙΑ (ESTIA): 2004) P. 143-‐145

Only men were allowed to participate, speak in public and vote for taking a decision. Even though it was a male-dominated society, one high priestess was allowed to vote but not express her opinion in public or take part in the Vouleutirion. So the city was actually governed by its own people, which is not true but still very progressive if we consider that the ancient world was dominated by years of slavery.

The only slaves they could enter the space of the “Council of nobles” was a team of slaves called “Skythes” and their role was to guard and protect the council of nobles.40 We could easily characterize them as the police in the modern world. But why did they choose slaves to guard the “Council of nobles”? One reason was because they were neutral to the decisions the Vouleftirion was taking, and another reason is because they were very passionate on their job. If a member of the “Council of nobles” was not appeared then “Skythes” were taking action by finding him and whipped him for paradigm. So in order to understand the Vouleftirion we have to understand the use of it. The Skythes guarded strictly an amphitheatrically shaped enclosed space that had four entrances in order for them to control the space better and also so that every member could be seen and listened from the rest of the council.

Another important innovation in democratic cities was that the above buildings places were located in close proximity to each other in order to have a complete collaboration on public decisions. Later on we will notice that prototype democratic cities have been designed and built based on the construction analogies of the agora, whereas the most important routes had to pass next to it. A huge step towards progression, freedom of speech and social care.

Summary points. Prytaneion and Vouleftirion: •

Prytaneion was located next to the Common Hearth. (That was until the Democratic city was borne).

•

Prytaneion was taken the last decision and it had to keep alight the Common Hearth alight all the time.

40 ΒΛΑΧΟΣ Σ. ΑΓΓΕΛΟΣ (Vlachos S. Angelos), Ο ΚΥΡΙΟΣ ΜΟΥ ΑΛΚΙΒΙΑΔΗΣ (O KYRIOS

MOU ALKIVIADIS, fr. Tr. “MY MASTER ALKIVIADIS”), (ΑΘΗΝΑ (ATHENS): ΕΣΤΙΑ (ESTIA): 2004) P. 143-‐145

•

Vouleftition. The genuine birth of Democracy.

•

Vouleftirion was formed by the true citizens not the slaves and the servants.

•

Vouleftirion was responsible for matters that care the city.

•

Vouleftrion was also responsible to bring the requests of the Agora to the Prytaneion.

•

Vouleftirion was amphitheatrically shaped, so that everybody could see the speaker and be part of the conversation.

•

The Agora, the Prytaneion and the Vouleftirion should be closed to each other, in the democratic cities, in order quicker, better collaboration.

4.6 Housing

Housing or private zones were around these public buildings and that was forming the city into one single entity with no subdivisions into zones. The only differences we can observe were in the size of the houses and by this factor we can identify the class structure of status in the Greek community. Great importance was given in public buildings’ sacred and political areas. Monuments were outshone from the rest not because of their size but because of their quality and their technical necessities. They were designed in a very austere way and as mentioned earlier, in a very dominant position (highest point). Houses were more practical in order to serve better the resident. They had also a shop at the front, which was identifying the profession of the family.41 The city felt as a living organism that had been born into the natural environment and completed the location that transmitted a simple architectural language.

Summary points. Housing: •

Were located around the Public buildings.

•

Housing had to be in lower position than the sacred buildings.

•

They were practical with energy consumption

•

They obtained a shop at the front.

41 Wolfram Hoepfner, Tr. Τσιριγκάκης (Tsirigakis), Ιστορία της κατοικίας 5000 π.Χ. –

500 μ.Χ. (Istoria tis katikias 5000 B.C.-500 A.D., fr. Tr., “The history of the house from 5000 B.C-500 A.D.), (Θεσσαλονίκη (Thessaloniki): University Studio Press: 2005) P. 151-‐187

Already we can observe a huge transformation of the city and that was because of the ethical evolution of the citizens. That `ethical evolution could not be done by one person so more rules started to affect this transformation. We begin to see utilitarian organization of the city: designing rules, division of the land for housing and finally the aesthetics. The city starts gaining “flesh and bones, even clothing and ornaments”. Finally there are established rules in order to improve the life of the people and of the city in order to create a healthy environment. Aristotle seems to have a more integrated opinion (he was coming from a wider field of education) on how the ideal city should be built. Despite the words profit, justice etc. finally the word city was taking a meaning and a definition. A city was "…an ethic corporation that was based on the society and the law's identity, the clarity and the similarity of the reasons for which concludes to a healthy state of mind."42 Roland Martin.

42 Roland Martin, L'Urbanisme dans la Grèce antique ( fr. Tr., The Urban design in

ancient Greece), (Paris: Picard: 1956, 1st Edition) P. 19-‐25

36 Â

The Ippodameion system is a grid-based patterning planning system following the Pythagorean principles of geometry. The plan layout is not so much important because it could be circular because of its centralized arrangement. The overall theatrical feeling it gives you while walking through the plots of land, but most importantly it is, a well thought urban plan because it studies the political organization and the social system of its era, which its whole arrangement is based on the last two factors.

5. The Ippodameion “school of urban design” 5.1 479 B.C. – 322 B.C. Design of the Ancient Greek Democratic cities. (The Hellenistic era)

This chapter will focus only on the design rules behind the Ippodameion system. The new innovations that was imported in urban planning for the first time. Rules that still exist such us zoning and common housing. In this chapter we find the importance of the Ippodameion syste by categorizing the principles and recognizing their contribution to urban design.

Thirty years before Piraeus was designed and built by Ippodamos Greece faced the second Persian invasion (480 B.C.). Greek city-states united together for the second time in the ancient era and won the war. The outcome though was that most of the city-states were thoroughly destroyed. That led into a new way of design with different principles but also keeping the elder ones as well. The person who was responsible for that project was Ippodamos. Ippodamos of Miletus was an ancient Greek Architect, Urban Planner, Physician, Mathematician, Philosopher but mainly a Meteorologist. He is considered to be the “father” of urban planning, the namesake of Ippodameion plan of city layouts (grid plan).43 He was born in Miletus and lived during the 5th century B.C on the spring of the Ancient Greece Helenistic era. His father was Euryphon. His plans of Greek cities were characterized by order and regularity in contrast to the more intricacy and confusion common to cities of that period, even Athens (Piraeus 451 B.C.).44 He is seen as the originator of the idea that a town plan might formally embody and clarify a rational social order.

The planning method used, was an urban design based on a plan of horizontal and vertical parallel roads intersected in right angles that separates the residences and the plots of land. These plots of land were identical in size and in proportion. However, they were constrained in width but generous in length, resembling strips. The reason behind this was administered to the practical quality and simplicity in

43 Roland Martin, L'Urbanisme dans la Grèce antique ( fr. Tr., The Urban design in

ancient Greece), (Paris: Picard: 1956, 1st Edition) P. 91-‐102

44 Wolfram Hoepfner, Die griechische Polis. Architektur und Politik, (Wasmuth:

Tübingen: 1993) P. 75-‐78

order to economize in energy and to apply a healthier environment. The principle design was to place the civic buildings in the centre of the city and based on their analogies to create the integration of the whole. The most important building was the Agora and everything was based on its proportions even the arrangement of the streets. Only the main street where allowed to pass next to the Agora. Also the Acropolis was still orientated to the east or the west but that was because of the whole city. The city should face the east and the Acropolis should follow the general plan of the city. This location facilitated the use of the public services. Fig. 5.01 “Zones Division”

The roads were represented as big axis that did not exceed the seven meters in width. The reason of choosing seven meters was, because that could fit two carriages that they were transporting the materials during the construction of the city.45 Their purpose was to facilitate the speedy access of trade and communication and not for religious purposes. There was however specific streets designed for religious purposes. These were narrow in design and opened wider as they reached their destination, the temples of the Gods. However these roads were fully compatible with the original urban design. The design of the road’s

45 Wolfram Hoepfner, Tr. Τσιριγκάκης (Tsirigakis), Ιστορία της κατοικίας 5000 π.Χ. –

500 μ.Χ. (Istoria tis katikias 5000 B.C.-500 A.D., fr. Tr., “The history of the house from 5000 B.C-500 A.D.), (Θεσσαλονίκη (Thessaloniki): University Studio Press: 2005) P. 237-‐249

linearity and of the larger buildings gives the impression of how the city is defined as a whole. It is obvious that strict mathematicians designed theses cities because everything on the design was based on the “Tetraktyos” proportions of the Pythagorean School of science.46

Fig. 5.02 – Fig. 5.03 “Tetraktyos analogies, Pythagoreian School of sciences”

Archaeological findings of the pre-Hellenistic era are rare because of the onset of the second Persian invasion in 480 BC. The urban design was based on the principles, taught by the Milicean School of urban design, which took that name in order to honor the Ippodamos’s birthplace. Technically this school did not existed but it appeared because the architects followed some specific rules. Forerunner of urban design of the school was the meteorologist (that was his genuine profession) Ippodamos, known as the "divider of the cities". Ippodamos has defined the locations into zones. The first zone was the public square which was an area dedicated to the commercial, military and public facilities. The second zone determined the location of the buildings based on the position of services.

This was not enough in order to apply a rectangle design with a road network, which would run through the city, but as plots of land, which served as dividers of zones. The political, religious, financial and social operations of the city were designed to be in the centre of the zones. The residences were located as satellite to the provisions of these operations. All the above were linked harmoniously through a simple, yet practical architectural language and simultaneously complimented the topography. Based on the above, we observe that the system

46 Wolfram Hoepfner, Tr. Τσιριγκάκης (Tsirigakis), Ιστορία της κατοικίας 5000 π.Χ. –

500 μ.Χ. (Istoria tis katikias 5000 B.C.-500 A.D., fr. Tr., “The history of the house from 5000 B.C-500 A.D.), (Θεσσαλονίκη (Thessaloniki): University Studio Press: 2005) P. 237-‐249

created by Ippodamos was executed in order to follow two basic axes where they follow the natural course of the topography separated by the perpendicular routes applied to a parallel system.

Fig. 5.04 “Sacred routes”

Fig. 5.05 “Housing”

The residences were therefore built in less steep locations. The result of this was to provide easier access to the citizens and emphasize the importance of the public buildings. The residences were facing south in order to economize more heat during the winter and to cooler in the summer. The plots of land were identical with dimensions of 300x120 feet and the proportions were derived by the Pythagoras school of sciences. The residential designs were identical for each residence. This gives the impression of modernism, which proved successful as it solved many vacancy problems in a common level.

We recognize that the democratic city-states of Greece did not use a cyclical development design. Lots of oligarchic cities had adopted it. This design method was designed in order to serve the king and create a city-fortress. Ippodamos method had no influences from other nations as it has no characteristic of symmetry due to the absence of large central roads. The creation of zones was based on the topography and in the military advantages in case of an attack. To conclude the system of Ippodamos formed a source of basic design with the only one difference. The difference was, that analogies differed from city to city in order to serve the topography of the city's location.

5.2 Differences between Democratic and Oligarchic cities.

In Oligarchic city states an elite of people collected all the power and the wealth. The se were parts of the royal family who was ruling the city-state. It was a group of privileged and politically powerful families whose children are heavily conditioned and mentored in order to continue their family’s legacy. Most of the Oligarchic city-states were ruled in a tyrannical manner.

The differences are growing bigger between the Oligarchic (autocratic) cities and the Democratic ones. Cities like Priene, Piraeus and Militos presented a timeless urban design allowing cities the option to expand and not to grow bigger, a phenomenon that was happening in Oligarchic cities. Also in Oligarchic cities we can notice that the residences area were bigger, a fact that shows the wealth of the northern cities, whereas in the democratic cities, residential was common to everybody without any exception with same size housing. That was a rule that Ippodamos proposed and shows a progressive way of thinking of its era, while the formalized construction could improve and solve lots of structural and functional

matters on a common basis. Mostly energy consumption. Those housing areas were designed based on analogies the Pythagoreion school presented 5:6, 3:4 analogies,47 with southern orientation in order to gain heat throughout the winter and coolness throughout the summer. From these analogies we can observe the areas were too tight on the two opposite sides whereas in the oligarchic cities where fifty meters wide and in order to achieve this, they used 1:2 analogies. Other innovations that Ippodamos had masterminded to improve the societies welfare were: the prohibition of construction of tombs for the wealthy and the introduction of social care for the orphans.48 Here we can see the first loss for the church and the first steps of building a city with a clean character, profitable towards the citizen that is the heartbeat of the city, so that the living organism can have a healthy progressive evolution.

47 Wolfram Hoepfner, Die griechische Polis. Architektur und Politik, (Wasmuth:

Tübingen: 1993) P. 56-‐59

48 Wolfram Hoepfner, Die griechische Polis. Architektur und Politik, (Wasmuth:

Tübingen: 1993) P. 56-‐59

Summary points and differences.

Fig. 5.06 “Priene”

Fig. 5.07 “Kassopi”

5.3 322 B.C. Principles of the Ippodameion system.

The city should have entrances to facilitate an easier way of life and better conditions of health and living.49

A city should be benefited by the countryside. This was a very progressive suggestion of this era. A collaboration of the city with the countryside can benefit both sides. A typical example is the medieval ages where both countryside and city reach their ultimate differences, because land was divided into feuds and the countryside was overruling the city. As we noticed before, the three needs of survival are all products of the countryside. Food, materials even money are produced and kept there. The city has other advantages such as its citizens benefiting from education in contrast with the inhabitants of the countryside were people are uneducated but are physically healthier and stronger compared with their urban counterparts. This needs to stop because the benefits of a possible collaboration between the city and the countryside can produce only positive results:

a) No polluted environment or water reserves b) A calculated and ethically sound exploitation of the natural resources c) Education for everyone d) Faster and fairer distribution of wealth and produce e) The supply of cisterns collecting rainwater for drinking purposes.

The city should be facing east.50 That will allow a warm climate with moderate temperature to cross through the city. When Piraeus (Athens’ port) was built, it was based on that rule. Later on when the Peloponnesian war was at its peak, a pandemic struck Athens. Despite the distance between Piraeus and Athens (10 miles) Piraeus was not affected, at least not as much as Athens. After two years people noticed that they were sheltered by the pandemic by living in hot places. This could be explained through biology.

49 ΑΡΙΣΤΟΤΕΛΗΣ (ARISTOTLE), Μτφρ. Π. Λεκατσάς (Tr.: P. Lekatsas), ΑΡΙΣΤΟΤΕΛΗΣ

ΠΟΛΙΤΙΚΑ (ARISTOTELIS POLITIKA, fr. Tr. “ARISTOTLE, POLITICS”), (Οξφόρδη (Oxford): Clarendon Press: 1964) P. 56-‐63 50 Vitruvius Pollio, Tr. by Ingrid D. Rowland, Ten books on architecture, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press: 1999) P. 17-‐22

Organisms can live in low temperatures, but in very hot temperatures they cannot survive. If the city was facing the east, then the roads would have more light and that would be better for the pedestrians. This is true, however by that time the biggest road was measuring seven meters in width.

The location should be appropriate for military and political applications. In order to achieve that, the city should have an easily accessed entrance and a cumbersome exit in order to surround the enemy. Aristotle mentions the need of having good design with orthogonal routes but with no perfect linearity, so that the enemy would not be able to see straight hence the defense would be more effective.51 So what is the architect’s role on the internal defense of the city? A good method to aid the city’s defenses is to create high visibility on every corner and at the same time create different habitable levels to secure the privacy of the individual.

The sea should not be too close to the city, neither too far away. This is because the topography and location is one of the most important rules for a safe city. Hence this creates the character of the inhabitants. Nowadays it is simply impossible to separate the harbor from the city and this forms an excellent way for communication with the outer world. It improves the merchandising of goods and services. The result of this factor made also another crucial chage. The temples should be separated from the neighborhoods and especially the wealthy neighborhoods in order not to loose their purity.52

The Agora should be on the center of the city.53 Agora should be situated in the city but and not in the outskirts, so that everybody can have easier access to it. Periphery should have another meaning, and can be applied for more intense work. Except from the public life, the prosperity and health of the citizens, he also commented on the private life. Here he mentions that

51 ΑΡΙΣΤΟΤΕΛΗΣ (ARISTOTLE), Μτφρ. Π. Λεκατσάς (Tr.: P. Lekatsas), ΑΡΙΣΤΟΤΕΛΗΣ

ΠΟΛΙΤΙΚΑ (ARISTOTELIS POLITIKA, fr. Tr. “ARISTOTLE, POLITICS”), (Οξφόρδη (Oxford): Clarendon Press: 1964) P. 56-‐63 52 Ferdinando Castagnoli, Orthogonal town planning in antiquity, (Cambridge [Mass.]; London: MIT Press, 1971) P. 31-‐34 53 ΑΡΙΣΤΟΤΕΛΗΣ (ARISTOTLE), Μτφρ. Π. Λεκατσάς (Tr.: P. Lekatsas), ΑΡΙΣΤΟΤΕΛΗΣ ΠΟΛΙΤΙΚΑ (ARISTOTELIS POLITIKA, fr. Tr. “ARISTOTLE, POLITICS”), (Οξφόρδη (Oxford): Clarendon Press: 1964) P. 56-‐63

everything should be a design based on Ippodamos’s rule.

If we could have a learning outcome from the rules on the structure of an ideal city, these would be: 1) Health 2) Water and air quality 3) Proper orientation towards the east.

Conclusion The

City’s

should

location

should

surrounded

be by

mountains. (Fig. 5.08) A mountain on the north covered City of Priene but it was set up on a cliff. The

location

appropriate

for

military applications. The city should be sufficient in natural sources. City of Priene was benefited by the fact; it was rich in water and marble. The city should not be neither too far nor close to the sea. The city should be benefited from the mild-fresh eastern winds. So the orientation should be from the west east. Priene’s site is on a cliff so it was open from east and west. (Fig. 5.09)

The red color is the flat

part of the city. Because it is higher from the res of the city’s location, it would be dedicated to buildings of great importance. The Agora was the most important building. As we can see from Fig. 5.10, Agora gains the most prestigious location on the site. Now everything will be built based on the analogies of the Agora. When the city reaches its completion we will notice that the Agora is “sitting” on the most influential position. From top to bottom: Fig. 5.08 “Site cgoice” Fig. 5.09 “Flat part of site location” Fig. 5.10 “Location of Agora in the centre”

The main road must pass next to the Agora. (Fig. 5.11) The design should constitute a plan of horizontal and vertical parallel roads intersected in right angles.

The city should be facing the east.

Everything should be based on the proportions of the agora. (Fig. 5.12) The proportional system used was the “tetraktyos

analogies”

the

Pythagorean School of science. The main analogies used here were 3:2 and

4:3.

Ippodamos

used

these

proportion in order to design other cities like Miletus and Piraeus.

Public buildings should be in the centre of the city. Everyone should easily access them. (Agora, Theatre, Gymnasion,

Prytaneion

etc.)

(Fig.

5.13)

Three zones. Public buildings In the centre. Sacred areas should be a bit outside and residential area is built around the central public zone. (Fig. 5.14) From top to bottom: Fig. 5.11 “Main street (east to west) passing next to the Agora” Fig. 5.12 “City plan designed on the proportions of agora” Fig. 5.13 “Public buildings in the centre” Fig. 5.14 “Arrangement of the three zones” (see also Fig. 5.01)

Centre of the city has been transformed

order

emphasize the Agora and also the sacred areas. (Fig. 5.15)

The Agora the Vouleftirion and the Prytaneion should be close to each other. (Fig. 5.16)

Acropolis should be on the highest point of the location. (Fig. 5.17) Here we can see at the top of the hill the fortress of Acropolis. Further down we can see the city with all the three zones

surrounded

the

defending walls.

The longest street decides the orientation of the city. They should face the east. There are two entrances one from the east and one from the west.

The houses are facing the south in order to gain more heat.

From top to bottom: Fig. 5.15 “Final arrangement on the plan emphasizing on the Agora” Fig. 5.16 “Agora, Prytaneion and Vouleftirion” Fig. 5.17 “Priene”

City’s

civic

buildings

arrangement has been done in

such

everybody

way can

that

have

free

easy access to them, in order

emphasize

the

theatrical design.

Meaning

the

theatrical

design was to show to the citizens that they are not just spectators but also active participants

city’s

decisions. All the buildings were built like theatres in order to express also the spirit of the free education.

There is no axis because there are not any main axes. The buildings are following the topography lines. The city

benefited

the

countryside.

All these principles form a Democratic city based on Ippodamos’s rules.

From top to bottom: Fig. 5.18 “Priene” Fig. 5.19 “Priene”

6. Ippodameion system at the end of the ancient world until the 20th century. 44 B.C. – 1928 A.D. 6.1 Introduction

After 200 B.C. Greece had been invaded by the Roman Empire. Romans established an empire that lasted fifteen centuries, from 44 B.C.

(end of the

ancient world) until the year of 1453 A.D. (the fall of Constantinople and of the Medieval era). New rules had come to overtake the Ippodameion principles, in order to maintain a vast empire. It is the dark ages for the Ippodameion system but not the end. In Medieval Europe, cities cared about their defense focusing mostly on the fortification of the city, and on the progression of the countryside. In the early 14th century A.D. we can notice the beginning of the revival of the grid system in northern France and Wales.54 By that time people were using the grid plan without taking into account the Ippodamos’s geometries and the social principles. The complete revival of the Ippodameion plan was seen in the Canary Islands in the early Renaissance years (1573 A.D.). It was unavoidable, because the whole movement of this era was based on the antiquity of Europe. From the plans we can notice eight principal streets running from the corners of a central square. That central square in ancient Greece was called Agora but in Renaissance, it was overtaken and stated as the central Plazza.55

After the Canary Islands the

“modernized” Ippodameion system, authentically continued into northern Europe, especially in Manhein in Germany (1606 A.D.) and in Edinburgh.56 Later on it continued into most of the Spanish colonies and into the United States of America and more specifically Manhattan Island. One matter that affected the decision in designing Manhattan’s urban plan was the form and the manner of the business that was to be conducted.

The commissioners (Simeon deWittd, Morris and John Rutherford) decided that it would be cheaper to build in straight lines and divide the island into plots of land. Also the right-angled houses seemed more convenient to live in.57 In order to avoid

54 55 56 http://zoecoles.wordpress.com/

57 http://www.library.cornell.edu/Reps/DOCS/nyc1811.htm

high building costs; they opted for the use of local materials. They decided that a main parade would lead on another large space in the centre, which was necessary and that was because it required a public market.58 Also in that space there would be a big reservoir to distribute water into the city. The first plan contained four thousand people, which was the maximum capacity of an Ippodameion city.59 The canal running through the centre of the city would form another public market where the boats would act as shops. The roads were running from the east to the west and were the exact same size in width, which in that way they avoided symmetry. Located in the city centre would be the business district, with the factories and heavy industry located on the outskirts. It is obvious that the Agora was separated into two parts. One would be in the centre and the other on the periphery of the city. The meeting places now were only at the businesses and the factories. These were the places where people could meet and discuss their problems during lunch times and breaks. That was a result of a financial change into the modern world and also part of the Industrial Revolution that led into a more integrated globalization concept in order to satisfy financial plans.

Manhattan Island is an appropriate reevaluation of the Ippodameion city. The design rules are reaching the point to be identical. The main road passes next to the main market etc. If we see the buildings in now Manhattan we will notice that each one of them is competing with the other one. A possible explanation of that would be that either Manhattan Island has complex laws in urban design or the city was designed in order to sell these plots of land for further development of Capitalism. Fig. 6.01 “Manhattan island, city plan 1807”

58 http://zoecoles.wordpress.com/ 59 Wolfram Hoepfner, Tr. Τσιριγκάκης (Tsirigakis), Ιστορία της κατοικίας 5000 π.Χ. –

500 μ.Χ. (Istoria tis katikias 5000 B.C.-500 A.D., fr. Tr., “The history of the house from 5000 B.C-500 A.D.), (Θεσσαλονίκη (Thessaloniki): University Studio Press: 2005) P. 237-‐249

6.2 Radiant City. 1922 A.D.

Le Corbusier’s Radiant city was an incarnation of some of the basic concepts of the Greek antiquity bound together with contemporary architecture and the modern social needs. The artistic side of the French–Swiss architect appeared in a great percentage of his buildings, but the factor of the organization and functionality can be found in his cities. Nothing was out of order and his entire model–cities were efficient. From Le Corbusier’s words it is easy to understand that cities should be geometrically arranged based on the political and ethical thinking of the architect. An architect should always have political thoughts and beliefs.

Le Corbusier spend some time in USSR in 1928. About that time he had the chance to meet some soviet architects and urban planners. Soviets believed on the “scientific socialism” a theory that had been structured by the father of communism Karl Marx. Karl Marx believed that some of the people that changed the history of the world were Aristotle and Newton. So he adopted some theories of Aristotle to his books. Aristotle the ancient Greek philosopher was the one who used Ippodamos’s rules on building a city, in his books, “Politics”.60 Aristotle did not agree on everything with Ippodamos’s theories. One of them was that the street must not be in perfect linearity because the enemy could move within the city easier. In general though Aristotle is referencing his ideas of structuring a city based on the principles that Ippodamos gave.61 It is normal, that the soviets adopted some of Aristotle’s concepts and used them on building their own cities and most importantly on the huge mater of the hygienic within the cities.62 Here are some concepts that the soviets used and later on Le Corbusier used them in order to build “Radiant city”.

The numerous clubs in every district in Moscow fascinated him, and also how the soviet architects had embraced the aspects of their life, by creating sports facilities

60 ΑΡΙΣΤΟΤΕΛΗΣ (ARISTOTLE), Μτφρ. Π. Λεκατσάς (Tr.: P. Lekatsas), ΑΡΙΣΤΟΤΕΛΗΣ

ΠΟΛΙΤΙΚΑ (ARISTOTELIS POLITIKA, fr. Tr. “ARISTOTLE, POLITICS”), (Οξφόρδη (Oxford): Clarendon Press: 1964) P. 56-‐639 61 ΑΡΙΣΤΟΤΕΛΗΣ (ARISTOTLE), Μτφρ. Π. Λεκατσάς (Tr.: P. Lekatsas), ΑΡΙΣΤΟΤΕΛΗΣ ΠΟΛΙΤΙΚΑ (ARISTOTELIS POLITIKA, fr. Tr. “ARISTOTLE, POLITICS”), (Οξφόρδη (Oxford): Clarendon Press: 1964) P. 56-‐63 62 Jean-‐Louis Cohen, Le Corbusier and the mystique of the USSR: theories and projects for Moscow, 1928-1936, (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1992) P. 126-‐164

and culture centers. In USSR, Le Corbusier managed to create on of his main concepts on building a city. Most important was that the cities needed to be hygienic, one of the first rules by Ippodamos and Aristotle.

“The city should be facing the east, because from the east blows a warm healthy wind in the morning… and the city must be rich firstly in clean water and in natural sources.” Aristotle.63

One of the basic concepts that Le Corbusier produced on his buildings was that the inhabitants should be exposed to the fresh air, light, the horizon and free spaces. Openness and light.64 That concept is applied in both Ippodamos’s cities and the “radiant city”, where in both occasion the buildings and especially the residences are facing the South in order to gain more light.

Further more another basic soviet concept that Le Corbusier adopted from the USSR’s architects was, that the cities they were building in Moscow had the feeling of a resting place. A place that when you come back from work, it takes your mind away from the day’s hard work. I believe, Le Corbusier felt disappointed though, from the quality of housing in Moscow. As one of his big questions, which was what is the true meaning of a house he decided to work on that factor more that anything else.

Based on the concept of city as a “resting place”65 and of the hygienic housing protected from noise and dust he started designing his ideal city. This did not happen though, until the soviet architects asked him to criticize, suggest and answer question that they have prepared for him for a new urban project, the “Green city”. The “Green city” would be in central Moscow. Le Corbusier answered their questions and he sent also numerous drawings explaining what it should be done.66 About this period, he started designing the “Radiant city” for central Paris

63 ΑΡΙΣΤΟΤΕΛΗΣ (ARISTOTLE), Μτφρ. Π. Λεκατσάς (Tr.: P. Lekatsas), ΑΡΙΣΤΟΤΕΛΗΣ

ΠΟΛΙΤΙΚΑ (ARISTOTELIS POLITIKA, fr. Tr. “ARISTOTLE, POLITICS”), (Οξφόρδη (Oxford): Clarendon Press: 1964) P. 56-‐63 64 Le Corbusier, Towards a new architecture, (London: John Rodker, 1931) P. 132-‐142 65 Jean-‐Louis Cohen, Le Corbusier and the mystique of the USSR: theories and projects for Moscow, 1928-1936, (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1992) P. 126-‐164 66 Jean-‐Louis Cohen, Le Corbusier and the mystique of the USSR: theories and projects for Moscow, 1928-1936, (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1992) P. 126-‐164

knowing the fact that France was a capitalistic country and not a communistic one.

About that time Le Corbusier was a Socialist. He had changed from being a Capitalist because Capitalism could not fund anymore any of his projects. Despite, Le Corbusier being an architect, we can identify that Radiant city’s design was based on the policies of Socialism. Now for Le Corbusier everybody should be equally treated.67 His concepts of the ideal city were incomplete. It is obvious that Le Corbusier started designing the city from the private zone, hence housing. From most of his projects and especially from “unite d’habitation” we can observe that a house for him should be a mathematical function or “machine”68, that you insert values and responds back with services. That was the starting point for him, in order to design a new city, something that was different with the decisions he took on the “Athens Charter” of the cities where he stated that a city should start from the public sectors. His new political beliefs led him into a new way of thinking and that was that everybody, equally, should receive the same services of a house, no matter the class categorization. So based on that concept Le Corbusier created a series of identical houses, absent of variety between them. Just one type of housing in order to solve the vacancy problems on a common level. That was the right part, but the most important division that Le Corbusier was missing, in my opinion, is that he started designing from the opposite side. He should have started from the public buildings providing the public services to the whole and so that everybody can have easy access to them.

Coming back to the arrangement of the city, if we examine the plan thoroughly we can observe that it is divided into three basic zones. A concept that he adopted it from the soviet architects.69 The first zone included the central market and the civic buildings (commercial zone) that there were responsible for the political aspects of the city. The second zone determined the location of the industrial (heavy industries, water tanks, software industries) part of the city, which was on the outskirts of the city connecting it with the countryside. He managed to divide the city into layers based on the “distribution of labor”. By “distribution of labor” I mean,

67 Le Corbusier, Tr.: Anthony Eardley, The Athens charter, (New York: Grossman

Publishers: 1973) P.25-‐32

68 Hall Peter, Cities of tommorrow, (Massachussetts: Blackwell publishers Ltd: 1996,

first printed: 1988) P. 215-‐217

69 Jean-‐Louis Cohen, Le Corbusier and the mystique of the USSR: theories and projects

for Moscow, 1928-1936, (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1992) P. 126-‐164

the process of producing a product. His public building had to be denser and outshone from the rest of the city. That could help in the faster transportation of the products hence the economy; the “health” of the city and finally the protection of the third zone. A concept that Ippodamos used in order to emphasize the meaning of Agora, Prytaneion, Vouleftirion etc., but Le Corbusier did that vertically by building very tall structures. Whereas Ippodamos was trying to find the tallest parts of the city and build them there so that they can be outshone from the housing zone. On these two specific architectural languages, I observed that the public buildings did not try to impress architecturally but with their simple linearity, by their display of simplicity and “power”. Fig. 6.02 “Radiant city 3 zones”

Software sector.

Housing and in the centre the public facilities.

Hardcore sector.

The third zone and the most important for Le Corbusier was the residential. Housing, was leading into a more oligarchic design because he gave more importance to private buildings rather than to the public buildings. Also we can identify a crucial similarity in that area. He uses a proportion of a ratio of 1:2, a proportion that was never used by the democratic cities of ancient Greece. Le Corbusier wanted to give a greater importance to the private and public living within the building, than the public relationships as we mentioned before. He believed that all the interaction should happen in the building, something that it is impossible, but he achieved to eliminate the concept of suburbs, which was a very strong concept about that time in U.S.A.70

70 Directors-‐Writers: Brown Jim, Burns Garry, Radiant city, (Canada: Sprawl Alberta:

2006)

Fig. 6.03 “Radiant City, all sectors together” Satellite cities. Government buildings.

Hotels, embassies, housing, markets.

Factories.

Water houses. Heavy Industries.

By this ratio he separated the city into plots of land, which were identified by the crossing of vertical and horizontal roads by facing the north. These two principles were the most important of the Milicean School of urban design but they Ippodamos’s cities had to face the east. We can notice that he used an extreme well-designed model of an ancient Greek town. He places the central market in the centre of the city and we can observe the importance he gives, by the complexity of the roads. He places a central market in the centre of the city and he crosses it with a central road, which gives a symmetrical shape to the whole city. The city is therefore arranged on axes. Also a very progressive way of thinking was that the residences should be common for every one. The assumption here is that, Le Corbusier follows dogmatically the most important principles that Ippodamos set two and a half thousand years ago. The need of zones into the city is to identify the various human activities and determine the space of them.

Giving a closer look to every residential plot of land we are able to witness that Le Corbusier was designing the city with the same patterning system as he was doing for the whole city. Each plot of land was reacting as an integrated city. That was because of its density and the Le Corbusier s essence of a city as a residential zone. Each “square” was able to give settlement to one thousand people. So each plot should react as an individual small city within the city. It was designed with the same principles, therefore designed and divided as the initial thoughts, into zones

(an example that later was on his famous project of “unite d’habitation”). The private and the public sector. The public sector (markets, sports facilities etc.) was placed in the center of the block and the residences were surrounding it in an amphitheatrically square plan. Everybody could perform and everybody could be a spectator as well. That derived from the theatrical way of design71, which was one of the basic concepts of the democratic ancient Greek cities in order to support the free education. We can find it in every civic building of ancient Greek cities. One of them was the gymnasium where, spectators were able to perform as well. On that particular situation we can see that the Radiant’s city’s sports facilities had overtaken the Gymnasium. Well-being should easily reach for everyone.72 These places could be characterized as the Agora of the “Radiant city”. Based on the concept of thinking a city as a resting place for the workers the true meaning of these places could be that there were the places that workers could spend their free time by playing and discussing.

71 Le Corbusier, The radiant city: elements of a doctrine of urbanism to be used as the

basis of our machine-age civilization, (London: Faber: 1967) P. 121-‐143

72 Le Corbusier, Tr.: Anthony Eardley, The Athens charter, (New York: Grossman

Publishers: 1973) P.25-‐32

Fig. 6.04 “Housing pattern”

Another similarity could be the timing. Le Corbusier started designing the city after the end of the First World War. The need of a simple yet functional and selfdefensive design appeared after the war. Le Corbusier also made plenty of studies on how the defense of a city through air attacks can be protected but he failed on that area. Same situation happened after the second Persian invasion in Greece in 480 B.C. Ippodamos was the one to come up with a design that the main responsibility would be, a city’s design that would be effectively self defended and that will provide a democratic way of living, same for every citizen. From the above we can understand that the grid is the fastest and cheapest way to build a city. After finishing his design on the “Radiant city” Le Corbusier suggested it as the

right model for the cities of Barcelona, Moscow and Algeria.73 The common factor between these three cities was that the topography of these cities was a flat land and they had enough space for such a project. It is worth mentioning that in Barcelona there was already established an urban plan based on the grid by Cerda (1853-1897).

Summary points. The radiant city: •

“The city is only one element within an economic, social and political complex that constitutes the region”. The Athens Charter.74

•

Everybody should enjoy the same services of a house. Hence common housing.

•

The air should be clean through vegetation.

•

The health of a city depends on everybody’s health. The sun is the major element of all creations. The sun should enter the interior of the residences. Hence the dwellings should face the south.

•

Each human activity should function to its rightful place. Hence zoning is the key operation. In radiant city there were three zones. The residential, industrial and the commercial zone.

•

Each zone should be placed in consideration of the public health.

•

Heavy industry was placed on the outskirts in order to protect the residents.

•

City is orienting the north.

•

Leisure facilities and the public buildings in general, should be accessible easily from everyone for free. Hence public spaces should be in the centre.

•

The traffic network does not go into the residential area, which makes it decentralized. Hence the public and the social areas are in the centre. Hence the main roads were passing only through the centre of the city.

•

The whole city had been geometrically designed based on the proportion of 1:2.

•

Each residential block has been integrated as a small city.

•

The city reminded an endless theater, that everybody active and spectator as well.

73 Jean-‐Louis Cohen, Le Corbusier and the mystique of the USSR: theories and projects

for Moscow, 1928-1936, (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1992) P. 126-‐164

74 Le Corbusier, Tr.: Anthony Eardley, The Athens charter, (New York: Grossman

Publishers: 1973) P.25-‐32

•

The city was designed on an open flat space.

The first attempt to apply Le Corbusier’s theories on practice was Brasilia. Brasilia was planned to be the new capitol of Brazil. The city was built in 1960 and the construction of the city lasted only four years (started in 1957). Now, Brasilia is a world’s Historical and Cultural heritage by the UNESCO.

The initial plan was supposed to accommodate five hundred thousand people and in forty years the population exceeded by two million five hundred thousands people.75 That crucial factor had the effect on the new capitol. Satellite towns were created around the city. The effort was too ambitious because as we can see from the plan Brasilia does not have an ordinary plan. Its purpose was to be a modernism’s break through. This factor we can notice it from its complicated shape. The cross pattern obviously symbolizes and give the impression that the city would have a monumental character. Despite that the plans were designed in order to create the new capitol of Brazil.

Brasilia, which was the first modern city to apply Le Corbusier’s ideas76 with only a crucial change. The starting point for Niemeyer was the main principle long axis for the basic public buildings. It was located in the center in order to serve every one and so that it can be easily accessed. It is the Incarnation of the Agora and the reasons Ippodamos’s established behind his principles. The forms, the position and the scale of the three basic public buildings identify that concept.

“The forms of the supreme court building in the left foreground, the saucer of the house of Representatives and the twin towers of Administration are so powerfully interrelated that they sustain tension across a space very much larger than that of the most traditional composition”. 77 Edmund N. Bacon.

The main principle that Ippodamos created. That was the social equality. It is a factor that Le Corbusier and Oscar Niemeyer tried to apply on their cities. These

75 76 Edmund N. Bacon, Design of cities, (New York: Penguin Books: 1976) P. 214-‐216 77 Edmund N. Bacon, Design of cities, (New York: Penguin Books: 1976) P. 222

social utopian ideals have failed partly until now, in all three examples. The social equality in ancient Greece was based on the model of the ancient Athenian democracy where fifty thousand people could create arts and science and the rest four hundred thousand were slaves and servants. Le Corbusier’s Radiant city was never built and finally in Brasilia we have a great separation of classes. In all three situations the social equality does not exist. That happened in Brasilia because despite the common housing concept people were not able to buy them. We can observe that from the rapid immigration of the Brazilians outside Brasilia. That was not a fault by the architect or the urban planner but by the commissioners and the government, because technically they are responsible.

Brasilia is an example how modern urban planning has adopted Ippodamos’s philosophies, which earlier as we said Le Corbusier did. The effort was big and the process very quick. Beasilia could not be considered as failure. Now Brasilia has lots of problems on water resources. One of the first rules that form an Ippodameion city Even though it failed its strongest concept (the idea that, everybody would be able to enjoy the same qualities of living) Brasilia remains one of the most important examples of the most important modern urban design application.

Brasilia has the most distinctive separation of classes78, but Niemeyer claims that his design has been distorted…79

78 Peter Hall, Cities of tommorrow, (Massachussetts: Blackwell publishers Ltd: 1996,

first printed: 1988) P. 219

79 Peter Hall, Cities of tommorrow, (Massachussetts: Blackwell publishers Ltd: 1996,

first printed: 1988) P. 219

Fig. 6.05 “Priene by Pytheos”

1) The city is designed for the first time based on a zoning system. 2) Public facilities in the Centre (Agora). 3) The main road should pass next to the Agora. 4) The city should be built on a flat site. 5) The city should be built on a site that would be rich in natural sources and water. 6) Craftsmanship was taking in the shop, which was located in front of the house. 7) Housing is around the Agora. 8) City’s civic building arrangement should be easily accessible and free for everyone. 9) There is no symmetry. 10) Amphitheatrically shaped arrangement of buildings

Fig. 6.06 “Radiant city by Le Corbusier”

1) The city is designed based on a zoning system. 2) Public facilities, Well-being in the Centre. 3) The main roads pass next to the public facilities, Well-being. 4) The city should be built on a flat site. 5) The city should be built on a site that would be rich in natural sources and water. The difference with Ippodamos’s prototype, is that on the radiant city is the water houses are on the outskirts 6) Heavy and software industry are outside the center of the city in order to protect the housing area. 7) Housing is around the public “Well-being”. 8) “Well-being” building arrangement should be easily accessible and free for everyone. 9) Symmetry exists. 10) Amphitheatrically shaped arrangement of buildings.

Fig. 6.07 “Brasilia by Niemeyer”

1) The city is designed based on a zoning system. 2) Public facilities in the Centre. The original incarnation of the Agora 3) The main road should pass next to the Agora. 4) The city should be built on a flat site. 5) The city should be built on a site that would be rich in natural sources and water. One of the biggest problems that Brasilia is facing is the water resource. 6) Heavy and software industry are outside the center of the city in order to protect the housing area. 7) Housing is around the public “Well-being” 8) “Well-being” building arrangement should be easily accessible and free for everyone. 9) Symmetry exists. 10) Amphitheatrically shaped arrangement of buildings.

Fig. 6.08 “Priene housing”

Common Housing for everyone based on an ecological design in order to consume less energy, made of local material.

Fig. 6.09 “Radiant city-housing”

Common Housing for everyone based on an ecological design in order to consume less energy, (vegetation in order to spread around the block fresh and natural ventilation) made of concrete, because of its price, elasticity and of the industrial revolution.

Fig. 6.10 “Brasilia-housing”

Fig. 6.10 “Priene-Agora and public sector”

Public buildings outshone from the rest.

Fig. 6.11 “Radiant city public sector”

Public buildings outshone from the rest.

Fig. 6.12 “Brasilia public sector”

Public buildings outshone from the rest.

7. Conclusion My aim was to find the connections between the past and the contemporary urban design based on ancient Greek urban plan. It is a big matter and solid conclusions can be found in all possible ways in any political environment. Ippodameion system is a very flexible urban plan. We can observe that from the case studies. However it needs a very critical analysis of the current condition of the society.

As we can notice from the chapters theme, they all have a common argument. It is not the geometry that formed the city but the society and the political factors. Through the passage of time these social factors take a different meaning. Some of them become more important and some others are completely forgotten. So its era has its own demands and needs. There is always though a core that will not change over the years, and that is the need of a comfortable life. People’s needs change over the time and we can notice that big difference if we compare the amount of buildings that the “Radiant city” acquire, with the city of Priene twentyfour centuries ago.

All the concepts that Ippodamos created were based on society and how it could be divided in order to achieve a better arrangement so that people can move in a healthy city. Concepts like the zoning system, which Le Corbusier used, still exists. The Agora still exists and all the main roads are passing next to it. Even though the meaning of the Agora is completely distorted as we saw from the process of time and that is because of the political changes in all situations I examined.

If I could give a definition to the city that would be: The city is a social structure that is based on the political system that governs it interpreted geometrically by the architect or the urban planner. Based on my writings and on the assumptions that have been made through the course of this dissertation.

Ancient Greeks managed to create a well known productive in all areas. One big reason explaining that rapid evolution was the choice of location. They had a standard “base” and they could leave their settlement without being afraid of loosing anything valuable in case of an invasion. The rules I mentioned before (flat

land, rich in natural resources etc.), of choosing a location are still in use. That is why we can still notice that the big capital cities of Europe (London, Paris, Copenhagen etc.) have been developed next to a river where the land was a flat surface so that they could build easier. These principles are still applied today and work perfectly well if they are followed carefully. This is particularly important with the emergence of global warming and climate change where water reserves are tested for contaminants and the winds that blow towards the city are not polluted.

Religion played a crucial role in giving some basic principles in Architecture and not so much on Urban Design. The Greek polytheistic religious model gave a unique language in architecture that affected not only the sacred areas but also the residences. It was not a style because in architecture there are no styles. It was an old way of construction, where as in Egypt or other ancient countries there were different ways. Religion created a symbolic way of interpreting spaces and in general structures. A concept that it is still in use and many architects (Le Corbusier etc.) has built modernism’s foundations on symbolism.

So in the beginning cities were built around the acropolis. No other public buildings were allowed to be built because of the tyrannies that ruled the city. The Athenian democracy of ancient Greece did a step towards progression, but the slaves carried out the production of goods. So four hundred thousand people were working and the remaining fifty thousand had free time to develop the natural sciences and improve the arts and philosophy. The Agora, the Vouleftirion and the Prytaneion were products of the Athenian democracy.

The Ippodameion system was a planning system based on the society’s needs of that time. The importance of this particular urban plan was not the well-designed grid based on strict mathematics. It was all the principles we mentioned before and they were a society’s reflection. That is the reason the Agora and all these principle buildings were built in the centre of the city. The Agora has played a crucial role in western architecture. In our days the meaning of Agora does not exist but there are parts of it we can find in a city.

Modern economies do

encourage citizens to go shopping and spend their whole day discussing philosophical matters with everyone. The modern day Agora could be characterized as the sports facilities, shopping malls and restaurants. The Ippodameion system is based on a patterning system. The grid was also a crucial

part for the arrangement the key building of the political system of the particular age (451 B.C. – 44 B.C.).

The grid seemed the easiest and cheapest solution after a destructive war with the Persians. The Grid though, was sophisticated in geometry and in functionality. Many times the analogies were following the morphology of the ground. The disadvantage of the centralized grid was that it could not expand. Another crucial factor that did not let the ancient Greek cities to grow bigger was because of the topology. So many of these cities, like Priene, were built for a specific number of people. So many people would have to leave the city and if the city had to expand a second Agora would be built. This prevented public buildings to grow bigger in case the populations increased. A matter that did not follow the fast progressive movement in the natural sciences even in urban design, because in the Ippodameion system we can recognize the emergence of sustainable concepts. They are the use of local materials, materials from renewable sources such as trees, proper orientation of the city to be exposed to healthy eastern winds, houses should facing the south in order to absorb as much as possible solar energy during the day and by having a connection with nature.

The Ippodameion system was adopted for the needs of that era which is normal. This does not apply to modern needs. Modern needs include automobiles but as I stated this problem could be solved easily because of its centralized design. The grid as a morphologic pattern is the easiest that can be applied on a flat land. It is quick and cheap, however as we saw, it is not so easy to be designed. All the social parameters take place and then the geometry comes.

As we noticed many Ipodamos’s principles were included in Le Corbusier’s design for the design of the radiant city. Most important was the part of the division of the city or even better the zoning system. All Ippodamos’s society’s utopian ideals were included in the work Le Corbusier, as well as the ecological way of thinking in design (housing vegetation etc.). Even the authentic revival of the Agora where the main roads are arranged to was intended to be established once again in modern urban design. Le Corbusier tried also to bring back the concept of common housing. A concept that have been successful only during the Ippodamos’s era in ancient Greece.

These principles were applied on the designs of Luis Costa and Oscar Niemeyer. There are very few books written in English on the city Brasilia. Brasilia became an application of all these ideals mentioned before. Most of them are in Portuguese, but we can see that Brasilia failed due to the same reasons as the ancient Greeks. Brasilia could not expand from all the sides despite the huge separation of classes and the depletion of water resource.

The Ippodameion system is still relevant but it has failed in modern world. The responsibilities of that failure have delivered to only two teams of people. First one is the architects and the urban planners and the people who run the city. The decisions are made in a common level. The Ippodameion system succeeded in ancient Greece because all this social utopian ideals were meant to be only for the citizens. The ancient Athenian democracy was created for the citizens, which were the one tenth of the population of the city. Meanwhile the rest of the people lived in the city could stay on the citizens’ houses. So, that urban concept was successful because it was dealing with the ideals of a small minority of people. However it was very progressive of its era and a huge step towards progress and the beginning of thinking the whole. Le Corbusier’s work was theoretical. Oscar Niemeyer’s Brasilia was not theoretical. As a design it worked, but as a social arrangement failed and it was not its on responsibility. Brasilia was meant to bring all the classes within one space, but the government sold the houses only to people that they could afford it.

We can still see lots of Ippodamos’s concepts, but as I said before the Ippodameion system can be found in many places and not everywhere at all. If we want to apply the Ippodameion system we can still do it. It will have to follow though some specific rules. However will have to use the wisdom we retrieved from history. The principles that have been set twenty-four centuries ago will have to be reevaluated based on the modern needs. Even though I believe that the Ippodameion system can be applied in an idealistic world were no corruption exists. This world though is very difficult to exist if not impossible.

In any case the Ippodameion system cannot be applied in steep locations. The need of flat land is obligatory. The most important, is that it has to be flexible with the society’s needs. As previously stated, it is an old way of construction and cannot be applied with the holistic meaning, like it did twenty-four centuries ago. If

we want to preserve the purity of the Ippodameion design, then that system could be applied in a socialist country again with a great responsibility, because that was the initial thinking for Brasilia. In order to apply it to a capitalistic environment, it could work there as well but in a small scale and that could be in the suburbs. Again there we will have to be very critical for what source of people we are designing because it can lead to the concept of the illusion of the unsustainable suburbia.

8. Bibliography (Alphabetically ordered) ΑΡΙΣΤΟΤΕΛΗΣ (ARISTOTLE), Μτφρ. Π. Λεκατσάς (Tr.: P. Lekatsas), ΑΡΙΣΤΟΤΕΛΗΣ ΠΟΛΙΤΙΚΑ (ARISTOTELIS POLITIKA, fr. Tr. “ARISTOTLE, POLITICS”), (Οξφόρδη (Oxford): Clarendon Press: 1964) Bertha Carr Rider, The Greek house: its history and development from the

neolithic period to the hellenistic age, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press: 1956) ΒΛΑΧΟΣ Σ. ΑΓΓΕΛΟΣ (Vlachos S. Angelos), Ο ΚΥΡΙΟΣ ΜΟΥ ΑΛΚΙΒΙΑΔΗΣ (O KYRIOS MOU ALKIVIADIS, fr. Tr. “MY MASTER ALKIVIADIS”), (ΑΘΗΝΑ (ATHENS): ΕΣΤΙΑ (ESTIA): 2004) Brazilian Embassy, Brasilia: history city planning, Architecture, Building, (Braszil: UMA Publicacao Acropole : 1960) Christopher Alexander, Hajo Neis, Artemis Anninou, Ingrid King, A new theory of urban design, (New York: Oxford University Press: 1987) Edmund N. Bacon, Design of cities, (New York: Penguin Books: 1976) Engels Friedrich, Die Lage der Arbeitenden Klasse in England: The condition of the working class in England edited with an introduction by McLellan David, (Oxford: Oxford University Press: 1999) Eisenman Peter, The Formal Basis of Modern Architecture: Dissertation 1963, (Baden, Switzerland: Lars Muller: 2006)

Eyck Aldo van, Tr. Gregory Ball, Works, (Basel: Boston: Birkhäuser Verlag: 1999)

Eipstein David G., Brasilia: Plan and Reality, A study of Planed and spontaneous urban development, (Los Angeles: University of California Press: 1973 Everson Norma, Two Brazilian Capitols: Architecture and Urbanism in Rio de Janeiro and Brasilia, (New Haven and London: Yale University Press: 1973) Ferdinando Castagnoli, Orthogonal town planning in antiquity, (Cambridge [Mass.]; London: MIT Press, 1971) Fritz Haller, Integral urban, a global model, (Walter – Verlag Olten) Hall Peter, Cities of tommorrow, (Massachussetts: Blackwell publishers Ltd: 1996, first printed: 1988) Jean-‐Louis Cohen, Le Corbusier and the mystique of the USSR: theories and projects for Moscow, 1928-1936, (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1992) Le Courbusier, Tr.: Clive Entwistle from the French Propos d’urbanisme, Concerning town planning, (London: Architectural Press: 1947) Le Corbusier, Tr.: Anthony Eardley, The Athens charter, (New York: Grossman Publishers: 1973) Le Corbusier, The radiant city: elements of a doctrine of urbanism to be used as the basis of our machine-age civilization, (London: Faber: 1967) Le Corbusier, Towards a new architecture, (London: John Rodker, 1931)

Leon Battista Alberti, Tr. Cosino Bartoli, Tr.: James Leoni, Ten books on Architecture, (London: Alec Tiranti LTD: 1995) Leonardo Benevolo, The history of the city, (London: Solar Press: 1980)

Μαρξ Κ. -‐ Ενγκελς Φ. (Marx K., Engels F.), ΜΕΤ. ΝΙΚΟΣ ΤΡΙΑΝΤΗΣ (Tr.: NIKOS TRIANTIS), ΚΕΙΜΕΝΑ ΓΙΑ ΤΙΣ ΠΟΛΕΙΣ, ΓΙΑ ΤΗ ΓΗ, ΓΙΑ ΤΗΝ ΑΡΧΙΤΕΚΤΟΝΙΚΗ (KIMENA GIA TIS POLIS, GIA TI GI, GIA TIN ARHITEKTONIKI, fr, Tr. “ TEXTS FOR THE CITIES, FOR THE EARTH, FOR ARCHITECTURE), (ΑΘΗΝΑ (ATHENS): ΤΥΠΟΕΚΔΟΤΙΚΗ (TIPOEKDOTIKI): 2003) Μπαλτογιάννης, Γεώργιος Β. (Baltogiannis, Georgios V.), Ιερή αρχιτεκτονική - Χθόνια και ουράνια (Ieri arhitektoniki-Chthonia kai ourania, fr. Tr., “Divine Architecture – Underground Gods and Sky Gods”), (Αθήνα (Athens): Έσοπτρον (Esoptron): 2002) McCarthy George E., Marx and Aristotle: nineteenth-century German social theory and classical antiquity, (London: Savage, Md: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, 1992) Milton Keynes Development Corporation, The Milton Keynes planning Manual, (Grillford: Chesterton Consulting on Behalf Milton Keynes Development Corporation: 1992) Morris, A. E. J. (Anthony Edwin James), History of urban form: prehistory to the Renaissance, (London: George Godwin: 1972) Robert Tavernor, On Alberti and the art of building, (New Have: Yale University Press: 1998) Roland Martin, Living architecture, Greek, (London: Oldbourne: 1967)

Roland Martin, L'Urbanisme dans la Grèce antique ( fr. Tr., The Urban design in ancient Greece), (Paris: Picard: 1956, 1st Edition) Rudofsky Bernard, Architecture without architects: a short introduction to non- pedigreed architecture, (New York: Doubleday: 1964) Wolfram Hoepfner, Tr. Τσιριγκάκης (Tsirigakis), Ιστορία της κατοικίας 5000 π.Χ. – 500 μ.Χ. (Istoria tis katikias 5000 B.C.-500 A.D., fr. Tr., “The history of the house from 5000 B.C-500 A.D.), (Θεσσαλονίκη (Thessaloniki): University Studio Press, 2005) Wolfram Hoepfner, Die griechische Polis. Architektur und Politik, (Wasmuth: Tübingen: 1993) Wycherley, R. E. (Richard Ernest), How the Greeks built cities, (London: Macmillan: 1949) Vitruvius Pollio, Tr. by Ingrid D. Rowland, Ten books on architecture, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press: 1999)

Websites

1. http://www.library.cornell.edu/Reps/DOCS/howard.htm 2. http://sustainablecitiescollective.com/Home/19321 3. http://www.uh.edu/engines/epi2542.htm 4. http://www.stoa.org/hopper/text.jsp?doc=+1.2&fromdoc=Stoa%3Atext% 3A2003.01.0003 5. http://www.library.cornell.edu/Reps/DOCS/nyc1811.htm 6. http://www.archiseek.com/guides/glossary/a.html

7. http://wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn?s=acropolis 8. http://zoecoles.wordpress.com/

Video and other digital media

1. Directors-‐Writers: Brown Jim, Burns Garry, Radiant city, (Canada: Sprawl Alberta: 2006)