II. MEDIEVAL “ORGANIC” TOWN
The medieval approach to the city, emerging in a
period in which urban
culture broke down, is complex
and ambivalent. One of the characteristic
features of
the early medieval attitude is a disconnection between
the
notions of the celestial and the terrestrial city.
Probably the most
explicit expression of this attitude
is to be found in Saint Augustine's
famous work, The
City of God. In this work, the
image of the city be-
comes highly metaphorical,
the term denoting a com-
munity rather than a
material city. Even in his meta-
phors
Augustine rarely refers to the city plan, to
architectural elements (walls,
gates, squares, etc.), or
to actual cities (with the exception of Rome
and
Jerusalem, both of which assume a highly symbolic
significance). The basis of “cities” is moral
values or
metaphysical ideas: the foundation of the terrestrial
city
is the “love of self” while the celestial city is
based
on the “love of God” (XIV, 28; cf. XI, 1 and X,
25).
The two cities, the terrestrial and the celestial, are not
only
unrelated to each other, but there is a contra-
diction between them. The City of God “is a pilgrim
on the earth” (XVIII, 54); the citizen of the Heavenly
City is
“by grace a stranger below, and by grace a
citizen
above” (XV, 1); Cain is described (based on
Genesis 4:17) as the
founder of a terrestrial city, while
Abel, who was conceived as a
prefiguration of Christ,
“being a sojourner, built
none” (XV, 1).
Like the Near Eastern thinkers, Augustine conceived
of a celestial and a
terrestrial city. But while in the
Near East the city on earth is believed
to be a copy
of the one in heaven, Augustine sees the two as alien
to
each other. In moral terms they are even mutually
exclusive: one belongs to
either one or the other. Thus
the hostile attitude towards the
(terrestrial) city, an
attitude that was to play a major part in
medieval
thought, is already clearly articulated at this early
stage.
This attitude may be understood as an expression
of a broad historical
process which is probably also
reflected in the development of the actual
medieval
town, and in the iconography of the city in medieval
art.
It is significant that in a period as permeated by
symbolism as were the
Middle Ages not much thought
was given to the symbolism of the city plan,
as far
as actual cities are concerned. The organization of the
town as
a whole was, as a rule, neither understood nor
desired by medieval
builders. This lack of interest led
to the well-known irregular shapes of
medieval towns.
Even in cities which developed from Roman towns,
the
additions and changes which originated in the
Middle Ages were made without
consideration for the
original Roman layout. The medieval town thus pro-
vides an almost perfect example of the city
that has
“grown” versus the
“planned” city. The narrow, wind-
ing streets (ruelles, Gassen) of
medieval towns and
their beautiful but unpredictable vistas could be
taken
as an expression of “organic life,” as the
writers of the
romantic period, in fact, characterized medieval life.
“Organic growth” as an overall characterization of
the
medieval town is not radically challenged by the
fact that, especially in
the thirteenth century, some
new cities (villes
neuves) were built according to a
preconceived plan, and do in
fact display some regular
features (e.g., Aigues-Mortes, founded in 1240 by
Saint
Louis; Montpazier, established in 1284 by Edward I
of England).
These “new cities” remained exceptions.
In contrast to the irregularity of actual medieval
towns, the innumerable representations of the
“Heavenly Jerusalem” and of other holy cities in the
art of the Middle Ages frequently show a regularity
and symmetrical
arrangement which strongly suggest
the image of a
“planned” city. In early Christian rep-
resentations (e.g., the fifth-century
mosaics in Santa
Maria Maggiore and in SS. Pudenziana), the Heavenly
Jerusalem is reduced to a simple round wall, but in
later renderings (see
Santa Cecilia) it becomes more
elaborate, sometimes adorned with towers,
gables, and
columns. However, in spite of the inclusion of such
actual
architectural elements, the overall shape of the
sacred city retains a
remarkable regularity. Thus, in
a ninth-century mosaic in San Marco in
Venice, the
city of Bethlehem has a clear oval shape. Even when
representing the earthly Jerusalem (representations
which are certainly
symbolic rather than documentary
records), the medieval artists tended
towards clearly
laid out, regular forms.
The iconography of the city in medieval art has not
yet been systematically
studied, but a review of the
rich material pertinent to this theme suggests
that the
hostile attitude towards the city has had a formative
influence on artistic imagery. Since the eleventh or
twelfth centuries the
city is symbolically portrayed not
only by architectural motifs (walls,
gates, towers) but
also by secular, inherently vicious figures and
scenes,
considered typical of urban life. The view of the city
as a
place of carnal temptation, debased entertainment,
and avarice is visually
portrayed by figures of jugglers
and acrobats, loose women, misers, and, in
the late
Middle Ages, by scenes of gambling seen against an
urban
background. In medieval art, cities are often
inhabited by demonic
creatures. Such figures and
scenes, sometimes appearing in the margins of
sacred
texts, frequently anticipate the specific realism of a
burgher
art.
