What do you think?
Rate this book
Egyptian Towns and Cities
This book surveys the main kinds of urban settlement and town planning that existed in ancient Egypt before the Hellenistic period. The evolution and growth of Predynastic villages is traced as an essential prelude to the much greater achievements of the Pharaohs in establishing first towns and then cities. The later growths are shown to be of two basic types, royal foundations and those which underwent a natural expansion throughout history. From this they are classified as constituting various standard types based on provincial centres, planned workmen's villages, military and frontier towns, towns inhabited by funerary priests and, ultimately, royal residences and the capitals. The range of size and material is tremendous, covering small closely knit communities of a few hundred people, towns with several thousand inhabitants and vast cities, as large as any in the ancient world, with tens of thousands of citizens.
- GenresEgyptology
72 pages, Paperback
First published April 1, 1988
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 1 of 1 review
August 10, 2016
This is a dry academic survey of ancient Egyptian towns and cities. Uphill does convey the impression that he is very knowledgeable about the material, but his presentation is likely to discourage average readers. Even at a bare 72 pages, the writing style is too professional to attract non-academicians.
The main argument is that there were state-sponsored towns and cities; and there were more "natural growth" towns and cities. The former were carefully planned and built to last. Many of the ruins made from dirt, mud, and local elements like salt, preserved the buildings for thousands of years. However, they do not appear to have been permanent. Even the funerary cities - religious cities for priests. The natural growth cities appear to have had less state support in their growth over the millennia. These include Heliopolis-Cairo.
The information Uphill writes is factual. He mixes archeology and urban science to inform his audience of the layout of the towns and houses. What he leaves is out is a lot about daily life - food, sewage, water - all important in the arid environment - especially in the state-sponsored sites like El-Amarna which may have housed 30,000 people and was quickly abandoned after Akhenaton died. There is not much about the natural growth cities. True, modern Cairo occupies Hieropolis; but there is surprisingly little about the towns and cities after the pharaohs.
Overall, I am impressed with the author's knowledge. However, I am disappointed with the brevity and narrow limits of the study. The book could be more informative. Instead, it looks like a quick monograph written for academic standing rather than a dialogue with an audience.
The main argument is that there were state-sponsored towns and cities; and there were more "natural growth" towns and cities. The former were carefully planned and built to last. Many of the ruins made from dirt, mud, and local elements like salt, preserved the buildings for thousands of years. However, they do not appear to have been permanent. Even the funerary cities - religious cities for priests. The natural growth cities appear to have had less state support in their growth over the millennia. These include Heliopolis-Cairo.
The information Uphill writes is factual. He mixes archeology and urban science to inform his audience of the layout of the towns and houses. What he leaves is out is a lot about daily life - food, sewage, water - all important in the arid environment - especially in the state-sponsored sites like El-Amarna which may have housed 30,000 people and was quickly abandoned after Akhenaton died. There is not much about the natural growth cities. True, modern Cairo occupies Hieropolis; but there is surprisingly little about the towns and cities after the pharaohs.
Overall, I am impressed with the author's knowledge. However, I am disappointed with the brevity and narrow limits of the study. The book could be more informative. Instead, it looks like a quick monograph written for academic standing rather than a dialogue with an audience.
Displaying 1 - 1 of 1 review