Helsinki

Helsinki, the capital of Finland, is situated on the south coast of the country, on three promontories surrounded by archipelagos. The geographical position of the city centre (Kallionkirkko-Kallio Church) is longitude 24⁰57^/ east and latitude 60⁰9^/ north. The terrain is low-lying and rocky. Along the coast the outcrops mostly range from з to 40 metres high, the highest being 62.30 metres. The coastline is gradually receding due to a general rise in ground level of 2.7 mm. a year.

Nine main roads lead into Helsinki, five of which are national motorways and four mainly serving local traffic. Seven of the nine main radial thoroughfares in the city are designed for long distance and urban motor traffic; they connect the city's main road network with areas one to five kilometres from the city centre.

Helsinki and its surroundings are the only region of Finland where suburban rail traffic is of any im­portance. Local services extend 70 kilometres along the northern main line and 40 kilometres along the coastal line. The average number of local passengers carried is 552,855 per day.

At the time of the census on 2003, Helsinki's population numbered 574,700 which was 10.6% of the population of Finland. In 1970 there were 271,524 persons actively employed.

The city's total area is 185.8 sq.km., of which 86.2 sq. km. is covered by the current development plan. Of the latter, 44.3 sq.km. are built up; the city's green belt and similar areas make up 41.9 sq.km.

Helsinki owes its foundation to the growth of the sea routes along the northern shore of the Gulf of Finland ^and to the coastal land routes running east and west; north-south routes existed as well. In medieval times the broad River Vantaa flowed from the central region of Harne to the natural harbours along the shore; from earliest times sea routes led from there over the Gulf of Finland to the trading centres of Estonia.

Communications and trade both encouraged settle­ment and economic activity to grow up along the river, which accounts for its position on the Vantaa estuary. Hunters and settlers in the Helsinki region soon became accustomed to strangers using the island and river routes. The northern shore of the Gulf of Finland became familiar to Swedish seafarers in Viking times, and after the city of Tallinn had been founded in the 13th century, Hanseatic merchants also appeared. The original in­habitants of the Helsinki region were partly Finnish (mainly from Hame) and partly Swedish. The name Helsinki would suggest that the Swedish inhabitants had come from Helsingland in Sweden.

The foundation of Helsinki was one result of the endeavours by the Swedish King Gustavus Vasa I to establish a powerful mercantile community along the shores of the Baltic. (Finland formed part of the Kingdom of Sweden from the 12th century until 1809.) To implement this plan, he issued mercantile and navigational statutes on February 1, 1550, in which he also ordered the construction of a new city on the Island of Santa-hamina. His aim was to build centres of trading that could compete with the Hanseatic city of Tallinn for control of the Russian trade. However, since the king's Finnish representatives and the local inhabitants preferred the Vantaa estuary, it was there that Gustavus fixed the site of the new city, to which the inhabitants of Povoo, Tammisaari, Rauma and Ulvila were ordered to move.

Helsinki was not actually granted a charter, but it received its first privileges from John III in 1569. By this document, the city acquired a territory of 8.33 sq.km., including the villages of Kumpula and Koskela, and the islands in the Vantaa estuary.

No officially approved town plan was ever drawn up for the city on the Vantaa?estuary. Following the lie of the land, it spread gradually westwards from the river-mouth. According to the wishes of local advisers and the newly settled inhabitants, about 70 house sites and a number of streets were marked out with pales. How­ever, the city did not fulfil the expectations placed upon it. The greatest obstacle tojits development was its dis­tance from the open sea, at the upper end of a silted-up channel that was difficult to navigate. Its population never exceeded 600, and it became increasingly obvious to the country's rulers that the city had to be moved nearer to the shore. This was eventually done by Governor-General Per Brahe.

Following a few intermediate stages, a site for the new city was found on the Vironniemi promontory, with sheltered bays on either side. The move was ratified by statute on October 2, 1639, and the present-day city has grown up around it.

The land on which Helsinki would be built was made over for the purpose by royal decree on November 20, 1643, which also confirmed the city's right to the lands it had been granted earlier, and simultaneously granted it all the privileges of a city. Helsinki now covered an area of 12.35 sq.km., comprising 10.08 sq.km. of mainland and 2.27 sq.km. of islands. The majority of the land was near the village of Toolo, which became the focus of expansion during the following three centuries. The southern end of the Vironniemi promontory, known also as Kruunuhaka, and the neighbourhood of the Senaatin-tori (Senate Square) were allocated for housing, while the land along the main routes out of the city were farmed. The town plan of Anders Torstenson, a Swede, was a typically Baroque conception. It divided the city into four parts, with the road network converging on a central square surrounded by public buildings and trading houses. Artisans' workshops and early industrial buildings were situated immediately outside this centre. The single-storey dwelling houses of the petty bour­geoisie occupied the outer districts of the city, which was ringed by various military buildings, granaries, arsenals, and so on.

In 1710 the city, which then had 1,000-2,000 inhabit­ants, was devastated by an outbreak of plague claiming 650 lives. The Helsinki of the 17th century was destroyed totally in 1713, when the townspeople set it on fire as the enemy approached during the Great Nordic War (1700-1721). Between 1713 and 1721, the years the Finns call 'the period of great warfare', Russian troops oc­cupied the city and a considerable part of the country.

Rebuilding commenced in 1723, following the guide­lines of the 17th century town plan. The area involved was no larger than before, but it was more densely built upon as the plots were subdivided: with the exception of a few central plots of 3,000 sq.m., the average size was 400 sq.m.

The town plan was a fairly typical one, but not entirely regular geometrically, since the uneven terrain and differences in levels influenced the layout of the streets. The streets were straight except where they had to skirt hills, as the main Hameenkatu thoroughfare did. Main streets were about ten metres wide, and numbered some 20 in all. The inhabited area was approximately half a kilometer wide. During the 18th century there were only about ten stone houses in Helsinki. All were of two to three storeys and simple in design. One of the two that have survived is Sederholm House, the oldest in Helsinki, built in 1757.

Most of the houses were built of wood; the better-class ones were two-storeyed with a mansard roof, the mansard roofs being ousted by the gables and thatched roofs with the spread of Neoclassicism.

The various functions served by Helsinki were reflected in its layout. It began as a-merchant town and long retained its staple character. When the Kingdom lost its eastern marches in wars, Helsinki was forced into fortifying itself. The fortifications originally known as the Viapori in Finnish and the Sveaberg in Swedish are today called the Suomenlinna; they were built according to the plans of Augustin Ehrensvard on the archipelago opposite the headland. Construction began in 1748 and their completion made Helsinki the most important garrison city in Finland. The army and naval officers garrisoned in the Viapori brought with them the ideas of Enlightenment, and by their contacts with the urban bourgeoisie contributed to the cultural development of the city. The construction of the Viapori fortifications opened a new chapter in the life of Helsinki, both materially and intellectually.

By the end of the 18th century Helsinki had a popu­lation of 3,000 and was already the chief city and admin­istrative centre of Unsimaa-Hame province.

Its triple role determined the city's development: the commercial, military and administrative activities com­plemented each other, but the question of the use and ownership of land brought disagreement between the crown and the merchants. The spreading of the ramparts from the island to the mainland was long considered desirable but, mainly for lack of money, it was never done. The plan to make Helsinki a fully fortified city was abandoned at the close of the 18th century.

Fire was the worst enemy of the timber-built city. The wooden buildings of the 18th century were largely destroyed by fire in the autumn of 1808. This disaster and the war of 1808-1809 brought an end to an era of peace in the little harbour city.

The beginning of the new century also brought great changes in the history of Finland as a whole. The Peace of Hamina in 1809 broke the centuries-old link with Sweden. Instead, Finland was annexed as an autonomous Grand Duchy to Tsarist Russia. The capital during the Swedish period had been Turku, which lay close to Sweden proper; so for military and political reasons Russia decided to transfer the capital of the Grand Duchy from Turku to Helsinki in 1812.

The design of new residential districts was begun at the same time. The planning and supervision of con­struction were put in the hands of a body known as the Helsinki Reconstruction Committee. Johan Albert Ehrenstrom, a former army officer, returned from Sweden to his native country and took charge of the work. The basic plan for the reconstruction was Eh-renstrom's own work, and it was adopted as a plan for the whole city in 1817. However, further design work went on for a protracted period, only ending with yet another master plan dated 1875, which was never in fact approved. It was to be the last attempt to make an authoritative master plan for the whole city in the spirit of the new Tsarist Helsinki.

Construction of the city as a capital began in the 1820s but ceased in the mid-19th century, when the low-interest loans essential for private enterprise building were withdrawn. The rise in the city's population levelled off at around the same time.

Ehrenstrom's master plan gave priority to the public sector's requirements, and the various functions of the city were clearly separated from one another in different districts. The administrative district, built of stone and traversed by broad boulevards, was segregated from the new residential, warehouse and garrisons districts. A new, more regular shoreline was created by infilling of the deep inlets. The Helsinki of Tsarist times was to become not only an administrative centre, but also a "wealthy and populous commercial city". Mercantile principles at the time favoured centring foreign trade on the capital, and for that reason the harbour was transferred to its present site and the approaches deepened. The result was the Kauppatori (Market Square), spacious even by present-day standards, and the plentiful docks and wharves. Although the concept of a fortified city had been abandoned, Helsinki remained a garrison city with four big barrack complexes. Taken as a whole, Ehrenstrem's master plan was of generous proportions. The centre he created for a city of 10,000 inhabitants today serves the needs of a city of 500,000.

Some of the public buildings around which Ehren­strom's plan revolved were never built, but for the buildings in the Senate Square vicinity his guidelines were followed. Several different architects have left their mark upon the centre of Helsinki. Architects Bassi and Desprez had brought the influence of Neoclassicism to Finland, but otherwise there had been few architectural resources. The German-born Carl Ludwig Engel, who during the Napoleonic wars had found his way into the service of the Tsar and become the city architect of Tallinn, was the father of a new school. On one of his visits to Turku he passed through Helsinki and met Ehrenstrom. In 1816 the Tsar appointed Engel as architect to the Reconstruction Committee. Later, he was made head of the Intendant's Office (Clerk of the Works), where he handled all public building projects and became responsible for the design of public buildings throughout the country.

Engel's appointment marked the dawn of a develop­ment era on a scale unparalleled in the history of Nordic architecture. Monumental buildings were erected with great speed in swift succession. Engel's colonnaded facades bore the unmistakable stamp of Neoclassicism. On the south side of Senate Square rose a homogeneous row of three-storeyed buildings, and the Guards Headquarters built on the north side was Engel's work as well. (Later this was transferred to another site.) The Senate House, now part of.the Council of State Building, was constructed between 1818 and 1821, and later extended to fill the entire block. Further out, beyond the limits of the centre, several important buildings designed by Engel were erected, among them the Governor-General's Residence (now the Banqueting Hall of the Council of State), the Guards Barracks in Kasarmitori Square, the Naval Garrison on Katajanokka and a number of private houses in various parts of the city.

The Reconstruction Committee had completed its work by 1825, but Engel's activities continued unabated. The great fire in Turku in 1827 led to the transfer of the 200-year-old university to Helsinki, where Engel designed a new university building on the side of the square opposite the Senate House. Its noble and restful facade, spacious entrance lobby and crescent-shaped assembly hall with its Corinthian columns make it one of Engel's best works, although his University Library on Unioninkatu is considered the finest of all. The Russian military hospital (now the Hospital for Internal Diseases), built in 1826-1832 and also designed by Engel, consists of three Empire style buildings which with the University and University Library form a harmonious whole with a street frontage of altogether 300 metres. The Botanical Institute, the Observatory, the City Hall and the Presi­dent's Palace (formerly the Helsinki residence of the Tsars) were all built by Engel in this period.

Engel's church buildings form a category of their own. They include the wooden Vanha Kirkko (Old Church) in the Kamppi district, the Greek Orthodox Holy Trinity Church in Kruunuhaka and his most impressive piece of ecclesiastical architecture: the Nikolai Church in Senate Square, nowadays known as the Cathedral (1832-52, Engel and Lohrmann). The original simplicity of the Cathedral, with its nave intersected by the transepr in the shape of a Greek cross, was compro­mised by the addition against Engel's wishes of four small towers.

Carl Ludwig Engel's work in Helsinki spanned a quarter of a century, during which he designed more than 20 public buildings which today dominate the city centre.

The architects responsible for the reconstruction of Helsinki, Engel and his best-known pupils A. F. Granstedt and Jean Wiik, were exponents of the Neoclassical style that had become popular in Europe at the close of the 18th century. The style reached Finland by way of Russia, where it flourished for some time as the Tsarist or Empire style. Warm yellow and brilliant white were the preferred colours. As was the case in St Petersburg, in Helsinki Engel was wont to incorporate columns and pilasters on his buildings, which were usually of three storeys, treating the ground floor as plinth for the columns. He broke up his facades into rhythmically spaced main and ancillary bays. Only in the Cathedral did he use a portico entrance after the manner of German Neoclassicism. A more refined style is already discernible in the facades of the University, the City Hall and some private residences. The Empire style gradually gave way to the influence of Biedermeier, and Neoclassicism declined in new Helsinki buildings after 1840, to be superseded by various styles of historical revival. After 1880 leading architects were attracted to Gothic or Neo-Renaissance style. Of their works mention should be made of the Vasa Bank, St John's Church, the State Archives, the National Gallery (Athenaeum), the houses numbered 25-35 on thе Pohjoinen Esplanadikatu (North Esplanade), and the Bank of Finland.

But it was the Neoclassical period in the 19th century that had a decisive effect upon the later development of the city. The present layout of the centre of Helsinki is still based on Ehrenstrom's projects and fundamental concepts.

After a certain time gradual industrialization and the diversification of the economy brought a growth in the population and required a reorganization of Helsinki's administration. The powers exercised since the foundation of the city by the mayor and the city magistrates were taken over by a City Council. The new body held its first meeting in 1875. The administrative reform also brought planning and construction under the control of the local authorities. As a result of industrial expansion and Russia's liberal economic policy, the Tsars ceased to show interest in the city's development plans, but the government of Finland, the Senate, reserved for itself the right to give final approval for all building projects. The new planning organizations were slow to adapt themselves to the changed circumstances, and from a historical point of view, decisions appear often to have been born out of compromise.

In the wake of industrialization, planning inevitably acquired new aspects. In 1870 the population of Helsinki amounted to 29,000, not including the garrison, and by 1910 it had grown to 130,000. The fact that Helsinki was becoming an industrial city could be felt in every field. Country-wide trading organizations, banks, insurance companies and joint-stock companies were set up, and the times demanded monumental buildings of a new type to house the headquarters of these economic institutions in the city's business centre.

Helsinki's growth started at the beginning of the 1860s but its final development into a metropolis began after 1880. In the course of time the changes in social structure affected also the outward appearance of the city. Indus­trial development involved the building of new factories, while the increase in population called for the construc­tion of more and more housing.

Earlier agreements made it difficult to increase the areas that could be covered by the development and improvement plans. Although the city owned consider­able areas of land, it had not retained its rights to develop them, since long-term leases had been sold to private individuals. Consequently there was no other solution to the problem of a rising population than to channel new settlers to the very outskirts of the city. Sites were leased specifically for the building of single-family-houses. Industry was directed towards zones in the north and south of the city. The first public utilities-gas, electricity and drainage-were set up. At first they were run privately, but in the early 19th century control gradually passed to the city. Around the same time the first specifically working-class district, Kallio-Sornainen, developed. Several small settlements were formed along the railway lines built in 1862, 1870 and T907; their success relied on the development of the capital and opportunities for employment. Initially the new com­munities hindered the city's expansion, but they later formed the basis for its territorial growth. Some became part of Helsinki as early as 1906 and 1926, but most were only incorporated in 1946, when the city's territory was greatly expanded and a new approach to suburban planning and city development as a whole was taken.

The 1906 plan for the Toolo district was the first concrete result of the attempt to incorporate complete suburban areas into the planning sphere. Modern development methods gradually gained ground. Helsinki came to be seen as a geographic whole, and the zones for its various functions were delineated. The first master plan in the modern sense was drawn up in 1911. In 1918 soon after Finland became independent (December 6, 1917) with Helsinki as its capital, the well-known Finnish architect Eliel Saarinen proposed a daring solution for Greater Helsinki, in which he sharply defined the city's different functions; the districts already develop­ed were to be regarded as fait accompli, and careful con­sideration was given to planning residential districts that would meet the requirements of the various social classes.

Today Helsinki has a long-term master plan, an improvement plan and a detailed building plan. The drawing up and co-ordination of plans for land usage are subject to approval by the City Council, the City Board, the City Planning Committee and the City Planning Department. The Economic Planning Section is the body responsible for medium and long-range planning and costing of projects, while the Architectural Planning Commission governs the planning of housing. Local authority departments supervise house building and costing by owner-occupiers.

Helsinki co-ordinates its activities with the surrounding communities. The government takes part in regional planning either directly or through various organizations such as the Helsinki Regional Planning Corporation and the Joint Co-operative Council of the Helsinki Area.

The control of building activities was traditionally the province of the city.

In the mid-18th century it became the custom in Helsinki to distribute responsibilities among the magis­trates on an annual basis, so that any one of them might take charge of building in rotation. Later in the same century a specially qualified magistrate was given permanent responsibility. In 1777 the city administration of Helsinki decreed that notification of intent to build was to be given in advance to the magistrate concerned. The plans for every public building had to be sent to Stockholm for approval by the building authorities there, and very often it was the Stockholm officials who themselves designed the buildings.

After Finland's annexation to Russia, the laws of the Swedish period, including those applying to building activity, still remained in force. Offices were established in Finland to replace the central offices based in Stock­holm. Supreme control of public building was exercised by the Intendant's Office, set up in 1810, which also had to approve the elevations of new buildings. (The suc­cessor to the Intendant's Office is the Rakennushallitus or National Board of Building.) When Helsinki became the capital of the Grand Duchy in 1812, control over building and improvement was delegated to the Helsinki Reconstruction Committee. After the dissolution of this body in 1825, building became the responsibility of local authorities, particularly of city architects working under the supervision of the magistrates. In 1878 infilling, embankments and other civil engineering work came ^under the authority of the Building Office (today the Rakennusvirasto), which was also responsible for the building the city itself undertook.

The first building regulations in Finland were drafted at the beginning of the 19th century. Earlier directives had referred to the whole country and mainly stressed fire precautions. The first building regulations for Helsinki came into force in 1825. They laid down the legal powers and responsibilities of both officials and private builders with regard to the town plan, even down to the painting of houses. The building regulations were generally divided into three sections: the first applied to the town plan, the second to the plots and how they were to be built, and the third to the methods of construc­tion to be employed. Drawings were to be submitted for all buildings. The Senate's approval was required for the plans of public buildings, while those of private houses were to be approved first by the local admin­istration, and then by the provincial governor. Drawings were to show the size of the building, its outward appearance and internal layout. A site plan, a section and an elevation drawing were required for official purposes. Before building could start planning permission had to be obtained from a committee including the chairman of the magistrates, the mayor, two or three other magis­trates and two experts. To ensure more efficient control over building use was made from 1850 of a land register in which the boundaries of the plots and the position of the buildings were recorded. Building inspections were entered in a survey book of minutes, and a separate book was kept for reports on buildings considered by the city administration. At the close of the 19th century, the regulations on the submission of plans were tightened. They had to be drawn to certain fixed scales and bear a signature. Reports on inspections had to contain a statement on the structural soundness of the buildings. In special cases the city administration had recourse to the provincial building office for assistance.

The competence of the city administration was mainly limited to adjudication. The city architects and the inspectors of the National Board of Building did not have time to examine every individual case. Efficient control of the increasing building activity would have required the setting up of more local bodies. In 1895 the City Council appointed a special architect as inspector of buildings, initially on a part-time basis. In addition, a representative from the City Council and a medical officer from the Board of Health took part in inspections. In 1908 the post of building inspector with statutory powers was created in Helsinki. His duties comprised the supervision of building projects in Helsinki and its environs with the exception of building work by the state. In 1912 an Office for Building Inspection was organized to discharge the same duties.

In 1924 a special commission was set up for the inspection of facades. It consisted of the building inspector, the city architect, the planning officer and two members of the City Council, the latter elected for a period of one year. In this way responsibility for inspection of facades passed from a state official to the City Office for Building Inspection.

Although numerous local bodies have been set up to control building since the beginning of the century, the city administration has retained the final word on building work in the city, including the right to grant or withhold planning permission.

In a constantly changing city one of the main concerns of planners is to preserve historic buildings. Nearly 900 buildings have had to be pulled down in the centre of Helsinki during the past ten years, a fairly high proportion of the around 7,000 buildings in this district. The governing principles for the protection of historic-buildings are as follows: to preserve the historic conti­nuity of the city by restoring the environment of various social groups in various centuries; to protect squares valuable for aesthetic reasons; to protect integral sectors and individual buildings of cultural and historic value.

Careful consideration is given in monument preser­vation plans to historic buildings and interiors to be placed under preservation orders. A list of about 800 buildings and interiors in the city centre has been compiled. The supplementary map to the city's devel­opment plans contains proposals for the preservation of the buildings listed. There are no time-limits fixed for their implementation, but they determine at design level the main principles of the restoration operations envis­aged, and have a bearing upon the city development plans as well. City plans are to be prepared, or if necessary modified, in such a way that the restoration of a building under preservation order becomes the only obvious solution, even from the economic point of view. Helsinki is responsible for the conservation of the old stone-built architecture of Finland. There are 190 two- or many-storeyed buildings in the whole country, which are over 75 years old; of these 81 are in the centre of the city. Art Nouveau style buildings in Finland number 350, of which 200 are in central Helsinki.

In 1970 the City Commission for Historic Buildings placed 183 buildings under preservation order. According to the building regulations in force, the demolition of protected buildings is subject to the consent of the Commission. Eighteen blocks in the vicinity of Senate Square have had a demolition ban imposed on them since 1952. Eight of the historic buildings in the city centre have been fully restored, three of which had been damaged during the war. The interior of these buildings was partly restored and partly rebuilt, but no changes were made to their facades.

London

London, the capital of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, lies on the banks of the River Thames, 80 km from the North Sea. Its geographi­cal position is latitude 51⁰ 30' north and longitude 0°. The administrative area of Greater London is 1,600 t. sq.km., its population was 7,393,800 in 2003. London conurbation covers an area of 9,900 sq.km., with a population about 11,000,000. The present chapter deals particularly with the historic nucleus, the City of London, which covers 274 ha. A quarter of Britain's industrial production is concentrated in the London area.

A wide estuary facing the North Sea, a deep river leading into the heart of southern England, and rising riverside ground, free from flood and marsh, provided the environment for early settlement. The site of London, with its fertile hinterland, would have attracted marauders and traders from the Continent, but its history cannot be traced with any certainty before the Roman coloniz­ation of AD 45. News of its mercantile activity may have drawn the Romans to London, but signs of earlier habitation have been obliterated by constant occupation.

While the Thames has been termed the father of the City, it was the Romans who nurtured its growth. They provided it with protective walls, fragments of which may still be seen, a bridge that has become a legend, a fort only recently rediscovered, and a forum and public buildings. Their road plans, radiating from London, were not unlike a railway plan of 1850. The admin­istrative genius of the Romans helped to develop London as the medieval capital of England. Foundations, many recently excavated and preserved in measured drawings and photographs, sculptures from the temple of Mithras and elsewhere, fragments of monuments and building stones, and earth burnt, disturbed, or virgin, suggest the layout of the town and the architecture of the period.

Over the centuries London grew from a Roman city of 131 ha, secure within its walls and ditch, to the present Greater London of 157,950 ha, the boundaries of which may be marked on a map, but are otherwise indistinct, as city and suburb merge. In common parlance London is still an amorphous area of habitation and business that has developed around the ancient city. It grew by the gradual exercise of powers and functions over a succession of suburbs, and as a result could be said to have differing areas according to the functions in question. Several London and metropolitan authorities exercised those functions, most of which have now been united under Greater London Council. No particular London area has ever been designated as the capital. Historically, all the absorbed suburbs and superseded authorities have combined to create the London of today.

The departure of the Romans soon after AD 400 was followed by the invasions of the Anglo-Saxons, and led to control of London being in dispute between the adjoining kingdoms of the Angles, Saxons and Danes, and subject to invasion from the Continent. Though its prestige and independence may have been weakened for a while, it preserved its identity as a cosmopolitan town. London became the diocese of Bishop Mellitus in AD 604 and the Church of St Paul was built on a dominant site. In the next century London was described as "a mart of many peoples", and subsequent wars and invasions served to emphasize its importance. When the English kingdoms became united under King Alfred and his successors, tension in London eased, trade prospered and the citizens were better able to defend themselves or buy off invaders. Prosperity is confirmed by the number of churches which had been founded by the nth century, some with a Viking dedication to St Olaf or St Nicholas Haakon. Meanwhile the City had annexed a girdle of land outside its walls, the first suburbs, which more than doubled its jurisdiction from 131 ha to some 280 ha subsequently reduced to 274 ha by the building of the Tower of London. This boundary has remained for a thousand years and still defines the local government area of the Corporation of the City of London. Beyond these suburbs the great church of St Peter's at West­minster and the Royal Palace were rising on the Isle of Thorney. At that time Westminster was in no sense London and when Edward the Confessor moved the Royal Court there he established a geographical distance between commerce and government that has persisted to the present day. The Bayeux tapestry depicts the architecture of Westminster, imaginary or true; archaeo­logical evidence of Saxon habitation is corroborated by chronicles and deeds.

Following the Norman invasion of England in 1066, the Bishop of Amiens recorded that the leading men of the realm gathered in London, which he described as overflowing with inhabitants and richer in treasures than the rest of the kingdom. When London and the whole kingdom submitted to William the Conqueror, the new king granted a charter to the citizens, written in their native language and confirming the laws and customs they had enjoyed in the time of Edward the Confessor; the charter is still preserved in the Guildhall. The new king expropriated only enough land to build the for­tresses of the Tower in the east, which may still be admired, and Baynard's Castle and Montfichet in the west, which have disappeared. They were meant to afford protection against invaders and to impress and, if necessary, control the citizens themselves. The French conquerors were eventually absorbed into London's population, as the Danes and Saxons had been before them. More churches were built, and priories and hospitals founded around the city walls and on the south bank of the Thames. The citizens also felt their way towards local self-government. A jigsaw of more than 100 parishes was overlaid by another of 24 wards, and sandwiched between were a number of sokes and liberties, all seeking to exercise some authority. The fashion of community groups attracted craftsmen and merchants who established guilds with jurisdiction over trade and traders. They grew in stature and multiplied in number until they became, as they still are, a vital element in the City constitution. Their Halls, large or small, are still a feature of the City, some like the Apothecaries' and Drapers' almost hidden in lanes and courts, others such as the Fishmongers' and Goldsmiths' boldly facing a main street and containing the accumu­lated treasures of centuries.

By the end of the 12th century a Mayor had joined the old hierarchy of Aldermen and a Council of commoners had been conceived, London Bridge was being rebuilt of stone, and the town hall, the Guildhall, close by the more ancient Aldermanbury, was shortly to be built. The present Guildhall, commenced in 1411, stands partly on the crypt of its predecessor, but its roof has been replaced on several occasions, having been destroyed by fire and war. Here the archive evidence of the City's development has accumulated continuously in the form of royal charters, books of customs, deeds, legal records, council minutes and deposited manuscripts.

When the City acquired the right in the 12th century to appoint the Sheriff of Middlesex and in later centuries wide jurisdiction in Southwark and over many miles of the Thames waterway, it did appear to be contemplating an expansion of its boundaries. In the same way the charters of many of the guilds gave them craft powers beyond the City. It soon became obvious that the medieval characteristics of the City's constitution, its citizenship, and its trade controls, could not be applied to the suburbs. The inner suburbs were inhabited largely by poor and lawless people whom the City was less and less inclined to absorb. Building surveyors, called Viewers, and Bridgemasters, often master masons, were officers of the City in the 14th century, and in the next century the first of a long line of clerks of the works was appointed, to join the even older offices of Common Clerk and Chamberlain.

Modern place-names around the City still bear witness to the growth of London - St Martin in the Fields, Lincoln Inn Fields, Clerkenwell Green, Covent Garden and many more rural titles survive, although the fields and gardens have long since disappeared. Surrounding villages were linked to the City by ribbon development along the roads. The conception of a wider London seems to have arisen incidentally from health legislation in the 16th century, requiring returns of christenings and causes of death in and around the City. The area from which returns were required was extended early in the 17th century until it included the whole of Westminster and several parishes south of the Thames. The Bills of Mortality became a synonym for London. Seven separate Commissions of Sewers were established for parts of Kent, Surrey and Middlesex, including West­minster, confirming the expansion of London. Views of London from 1550, by Wyngarde, Agas, Hoefnagel, Norden and Visscher, show the congestion inevitable in an international market place. A house in or near the City was essential for court and church dignitaries, lawyers, merchants, and government officials. Tenements and divided houses jostled mansion houses, and trade required more warehouses, counting houses and offices. The Royal Exchange built in 1566 occupied the site of 80 habitations, and was the herald of future develop­ments.

From 1570 efforts were made locally and nationally to limit congestion in London by orders prohibiting the building of houses within three miles of the gates of the City on sites not formerly built upon and against the dividing of houses into lodgings. Waste and common land was to be preserved for the recreation and health of the people, but in 1592 the restriction on building was lifted in respect of houses of the better sort. In so far as the orders were effective they encouraged an even wider London, where local controls were still negligible. Some attempts were made at the end of the i6th century to provide Westminster with an effective council of bur­gesses, later to incorporate the suburbs with the City, and eventually to establish a separate corporation of Westminster and the suburbs, but to no avail. Building Surveyors were appointed from 1763 to regulate building works within the area of the Bills of Mortality, but they contributed little to local government or architectural ap­pearance, being concerned mainly with structural safety.

The Great Plague of 1665 and the Great Fire of the following year stimulated suburban development and encouraged the more prosperous to maintain a mansion in the country as well as a house in town. Almost three quarters of the houses in the City were destroyed. Rebuilding was regulated by statute as to the number of storeys, thickness of walls, and scantlings of timber, which transformed the architectural appearance of the City. Many streets were widened, realigned and levelled, projecting upper storeys were prohibited, ornament became minimal and street markets were removed. The City had a new shape, plainer but healthier. Architecture relief was provided by Christopher Wren, who rebuilt St Paul's Cathedral and the towers and spires of some 50 churches. These were paid for out of a tax on coal entering an area within a radius of about twelve miles around the City. Remarkably, this tax continued to finance street improvements and public utilities in Greater London until 1889. From the 17th century, archives, descriptive surveys, views and plans of London, its suburbs and individual buildings are so numerous and in such diverse custody as to defy composite description.

The City became more commercial and less domestic. Although the banks were the town houses of bankers, and some remained so until modern times, the residential area moved progressively westward from Covent Garden to Soho, Cavendish, Berkeley, Grosvenor and other squares that were being laid out in what was to become known as the West End. Streets of elegant terraced houses joined the squares and acted as a foil to the mansions of the aristocracy designed for public life and festivities by architects such as Ware, Hawksmoor, Gibbs, Dance and Adams. London's architecture owed much to royal patronage, from Westminster Hall to Regent Street, from St James's Palace to Kensington Palace and from Hampton Court to Greenwich. Prince Albert, George IV and other monarchs encouraged and initiated building operations. Even so the development of the Capital was piecemeal over long periods. The house built in a mulberry garden for the Duke of Buckingham in 1703 eventually became the Royal residence of Buckingham Palace. The outline plan of that part of London was already settled; it was dictated by the large estates of the Crown, the church and noble lords, which inevitably were developed for gentlemen's houses.

The growing labouring class, so vital to London's commercial prosperity, massed within walking distance of their work, in houses vacated by tradesmen and in the poorer areas by the river. A belt of cheap labour encircled the City, absorbed the Huguenots, Irish and other immigrants and provided bases for numerous small manufactories. Some of the houses of the Spitalfields weavers have been preserved.

Ever widening overseas trade required river accom­modation beyond the ancient legal quays and sufferance wharves adjacent to London Bridge. The size of ships was increasing and tonnage entering London doubled between 1750 and 1800. The West India Dock and its warehouses, covering some 125 ha down river on the Isle of Dogs, opened in 1802, to be quickly followed by the London Docks at Wapping, the East India Docks at Blackwall and the Surrey Commercial Docks of some 130 ha at Rotherhithe; later the Royal Docks and St Katharine's Dock were added. Inevitably the east Lon­don suburbs were soon closely built up with terraced houses for the workers, and Dockland remained a hive of activity- until the intensive bombing of the area during the Second World War. After the war a decline in trade, a change in transport methods, industrial unrest in the docks, and even larger ships, accelerated the closure of nearly all the London docks and the establishment of Tilbury, some 35 km from the City, as the port for London. Large derelict areas await modern development. London as a port encouraged shipping and insurance companies to establish headquarters in the City, and the world-wide services of such institutions have been in demand ever since.

The population of London increased from some 575,000 in 1700 to 900,000 in 1800, all massed within some 5 km of St Paul's. Pressure was released soon after 1800 by a transport revolution. Short-stage coaches began daily services from the suburbs, and were followed by larger horse-drawn omnibuses. The modern commuter was born. London Bridge became a railway terminus in 1836 and soon the City and West End were encircled by stations, some of architectural merit. These termini were linked from 1863 onwards by underground railways. The enormous railway works (there are 16 large stations in inner London alone), the villa and terrace develop­ments throughout the suburbs, and improvements to Westminster, with new streets and squares, theatres, clubs, parks, palace and parliament, created a building boom, attracted more workmen and brought commercial prosperity. The census of 1851 still considered London as the area covered by the Bills of Mortality and found there a population of 2,236,000. Clearly such a large mass of people required comprehensive local government.

The Metropolitan Police Force was established in 1829 and was given jurisdiction ten years later over a district within a radius of some 24 km of Charing Cross, roughly the area in which the London coal duties were collected. From 1834 parishes combined for poor relief and each union established a Board of Guardians. In 1855 the local vestries were reformed and a Metropolitan Board of Works was established to construct sewers, make new streets, control buildings and carry out other general functions,, but only in an area of some 30,000 ha, one fifth of the police district. The Board executed a distin­guished array of metropolitan improvements, including embankments north and south of the river, which greatly improved the vistas around Westminster. Meanwhile the central area, somewhat relieved of housing, was being transformed by more imposing buildings with wider frontages, which were favoured by banks, insurance companies and commercial firms who used their premises to emphasize prestige and stability. Architecture also relieved the impact of new asylums, pumping stations, markets, viaducts and even dwellings for the labouring classes.

Administration continued to lag behind physical development even when London was constituted a county in 1889. The new county, carved out of the counties of Middlesex, Surrey and Kent, was still confined to the former area of the Board of Works. Its population ex­ceeded 4,000,000, but a further 1,400,000 lived in the Metropolitan Police area but still outside the county. The powers of London County Council were limited by the two-tier system, which reserved local powers to con­stituent districts. In 1899 these districts were elevated to Metropolitan Boroughs and thereafter the historian must be prepared for delegation and consultation between authorities and an increasing participation by government departments. Within its area the London County Council gradually increased its functions, absorbing such bodies as the London School Board and the London Asylums Board. Its building works, functional and dignified, were rarely ornamental, but County Hall, with its embank­ment, must surely be the Council's monument, for it gave rise to a South Bank complex. The Council preserved at County Hall a complete archive of its own activities and of its several predecessors, and sponsored the publication of a Survey of London, parish by parish.

Meanwhile the ancient City Corporation made new-approaches to London Bridge, built Tower Bridge, widened its other bridges, rebuilt the central markets and the Central Criminal Court, and established, far beyond its boundaries, an isolation hospital, an asylum and a school, while acquiring ownership of nearly 2,900 ha to preserve as open spaces. City, borough and county councils all contributed to, and in some degree controlled, London's development.

The 20th century is the era of town planning and has produced in London an abundance of reports and plans of general schemes, actual developments and particular buildings, of which records are often duplicated, with local comment, in ministry, county and borough. Progress in planning following the tentative Act of 1909 was disrupted by the two World Wars. A Greater London Planning Committee was set up in 1927, long before Greater London was itself constituted a local authority. The report of the Royal Commission on Local Govern­ment in Greater London, 1957-60, emphasized the need for an authority with wider jurisdiction. Greater London Council was set up by the London Government Act of 1963 and began to operate in 1965. Whereas the old County Council controlled an area of 30,141 ha. Greater London Council has jurisdiction over 157,950 ha and includes within its boundaries 32 London boroughs and the City, with 12,654 km of roads. The population of Greater London, 6,586,000 in 1901, had continued to increase until 1939, when it stood at 8,615,000. Destruction by war, post-war government policy of decentralization and more spacious layout in reconstruction had reduced the population of Greater London by 1976 to 7,027,600. This was enhanced by the so-called Abercrombie Plan. Inner London is defined as a circular area with a radius of roughly 8 km. It includes the City, which is today the controlling centre of British economic life. The City's resident population is just around 5,000, but a million people work there.

A strategic Greater London Development Plan was produced by Greater London Council in 1969 and modified by the government in 1976. Meanwhile, much London rebuilding had proceeded by agreement of the borough councils, with the help of declaratory orders and compulsory purchase. Conservation areas and precinct units were attempts to preserve local charac­teristics. Tall office buildings and tower blocks of fiats pierce the skyline as church spires used to do, but Thamesmead, with 14,800 homes, traffic-free areas and a yacht marine, the Barbican with its elevated walkways, arts centre, museum and schools, and the Royal Festival Hall complex on the South Bank are interesting exper­iments in planning and architecture. The development of the capital is further illustrated by the rebuilding of London Bridge, the construction of a Thames tidal flood barrier at Woolwich and a National Sports Centre at Crystal Palace.

Moscow

Moscow is the capital of Russia. The city lies in the northern part of the Central Russian heights between the river Volga and the river Oka at a height of 120 metres above sea level, its geo­graphical position being 55°45' N and 37°37' E. By virtue of its favourable geographical situation and the construction of waterways, the city has access to the sea.

Moscow is built on a radial, circular system, which has taken shape in the course of history and has been further expanded by new ring roads. The Moscow outer ring road, which marks the limits of the city, is 109 kilometres long. The administrative area of the city was 878 square kilometres and its population on 2003, was 10,101,500.

The historical and archaeological evidence of early settlements on the site of the future city and in its envi­rons date back to the end of the first millennium AD, when the future Moscow area was settled by Slavs, the Via-tichi, who originally formed the ethnic core of Moscow's population. It is believed that the most ancient site of their settlement is the hill at the confluence of the Ne-glinnaya and Moskva rivers. The thick pine and mixed forests, and the broken terrain cut by ravines and river­beds, created suitable conditions for settlement and protection from enemy attacks. Numerous archaeological research works have shown that in the tenth and eleventh centuries, long before Moscow was mentioned in the chronicles, a fortified town-type settlement existed on the site of the future city. It was situated in the south­western part of the present Kremlin.

Moscow was first mentioned in the Ipatiev chronicles in 1147, and at that time the town covered an area of one hectare. A few years later one of Moscow's first fortresses, the Kremlin, was erected.

A considerable part was played in Moscow's develop­ment by its advantageous geographical location at the crossroads of two extremely important land routes - from Novgorod through Volokolamsk to Ryazan and from Kiev and Smolensk to Rostov Veliki, Suzdal and Vladimir - and also by the waterways of the rivers Moskva, Yauza and Klyazma. The Moscow Kremlin occupied a commanding position on the high Borovitsky hill over­looking the spot where the Neglinnaya flows into the river Moskva. The Kremlin was enclosed by an eight-metre-thick earthen rampart with sturdy wooden sup­ports at the base. In the thirteenth century Moscow increasingly became a trade and handicrafts centre, with tradespeople settling around the Kremlin. Gradually the Moscow artisans began to make their homes in the district which is today known as Zaryadie. Among the artisans of ancient Moscow, the potters, blacksmiths, founders, shoemakers, tanners, armourers and jewellers were particularly noted for their skill.

In 1237, the huge hordes of the Mongols (commonly called the Tatars) seized most of the principalities in north-eastern Rus, taking advantage of the internecine strife between the Russian princes. The armies of Batu Khan burst into Moscow and left it in ashes and ruins. But the fact that Moscow was so far away from the Golden Horde allowed the town to develop again both politically and economically. At the beginning of the fourteenth century, the area of the Moscow principality was expanded.

In 1339-40, the Moscow Kremlin was rebuilt and further enlarged. By order of Prince Ivan Kalita, the Kremlin area was enclosed by sturdy oaken walls. In those years Moscow received its "yarlyk" (seal of investiture) from the khans of the Golden Horde, as "the great principality", that is, it was given a dominating position among the Russian principalities.

The town itself was also growing. Roads stretched from the Kremlin, the political, economic and religious centre of Moscow, to various parts of Russia: Smolensk, Novgorod, Tver, Dmitrov, Yaroslavl and Vladimir. Gradually these roads became lined with the houses of artisans and tradesmen, forming radial streets which created the basic pattern of the future city. Many of them long retained the names of the old roads.

The wooden Kremlin was burnt down in the great fire of 1365, and a Kremlin of white stone was built on the site. The length of its walls, which had their six towers with gates, reached two versts.

The rapid growth of the town itself and its population (from 30,000 to 40,000 in the fourteenth century) created a need for fortifications at the more distant approaches to the Kremlin as well. At the very beginning of the fourteenth century the Danilov Monastery, the first such outpost, was built on the southern outskirts of Moscow. The Petrovsky Monastery and the Convent of the Nativity (Rozhdestvensky), the Andronnikov and Simonov, Sretensky and Novinsky, and Donskoi monasteries, and the New Maiden's Convent (Novodevichy) were all erected during the fourteenth to sixteenth centuries. Settlements of working people sprang up around the monasteries, and new streets appeared such as Rozhdest-venka, Petrovka, Yauzskaya, Vorontsovskaya, and so on.

On September 8, 1380, the united armies of the Rus­sian principalities led by Prince Dmitry of Moscow defeated the Mongol armies of Mamai Khan on the field of Kulikovo. This was the splendid beginning of the victorious struggle of the Russian people for in­dependence.

The creation of a single government in Moscow brought an end to feudal internecine strife, by concentrating power in the hands of the Prince of Moscow, so that the country's independence could be successfully defend­ed. By the end of the fifteenth century Moscow had become the most important trading centre in the state of Rus, and was generally recognized as the national capital of the Russian people.

In 1480, a great victory finally put an end to Tatar power in Rus and freed Europe from the Mongol threat.

Moscow's rapidly growing economic and political sig­nificance in the first half of the fourteenth century was the main reason for moving the metropolitan's residence to Moscow, which from then on became the ecclesiastical centre of all of Russia.

At the turn of the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries a single, centralized Russian state was formed.

The growth of the state's political might was reflected in the way the town was developed, built up and planned.

In 1475-79, the new Cathedral of the Assumption, de­signed by the Italian architect Aristotele Fioravante, was erected. This cathedral was built according to the canons of Russian architecture and became the state's main cathedral. The second to be built was the Cathedral of the Annunciation (1484-89), followed by the Cathedral of the Archangel (1505-09). The Faceted Hall had been built somewhat earlier, and by the end of 1600 the construction of the Belfry of Ivan the Great had been completed. Thus, the Cathedral Square in the Kremlin took shape and came to symbolize the complete forma­tion of a unified Russian state.

At the same time, new brick walls were built around the Kremlin, and these have in the main been preserved to the present day. Red Square (in Old Russian "krasny" -red-also meant "beautiful") was created along the east wall of the Kremlin. In the middle of the sixteenth cen­tury, on the south side of Red Square overlooking the river Moskva, the Cathedral of the Intercession was erected to commemorate the conquest of Kazan. This cathedral is one of the masterpieces of Russian architec­ture. On the western side of the square stood rows of market stalls, as many as two hundred of them. Each row of stalls bore the name of the goods that were sold there, for instance harness row, saddle row, needle row.

In the sixteenth century Moscow was one of the largest towns in Europe, occupying an area of 533 hectares, with a population of about 200,000. As the population was so large, the working people were turned out of the Kremlin area, and some of the merchants and artisans settled separately in Zamoskvorechie (beyond the Moskva river) and in Zaryadie. The areas of Moscow beyond the river Neglinnaya (Zaneglimenie) and beyond the river Yauza (Zayauza) were also extensively settled.

Moscow gained in importance as an economic centre. Settlements of craftsmen mushroomed and expanded in Moscow, and subsequently many squares and streets in the town were named after them: the "Kuznechnaya sloboda" (the blacksmiths' settlement-Kuznetsky Most [Blacksmiths' Road]), the Goncharnaya sloboda (the potters' settlement-embankment, passage and lanes), the Kozhevennaya sloboda (tanners' settlements-embank­ment, street, lanes), and the Taganskaya, Kotelniches-kaya (boilers'), Kadashi and Khamovniki (linen weavers) settlements. Special settlements for those who served the court were called Povarskaya (cooks'), Khleb-naya (bakers'), Stolovaya (stewards'), Konyushennaya (Grooms') and so on. All in all, the settlements of the court officials, the military, the monasteries and the "taxed", i.e., bearing the main burden of the city's taxes, num­bered up to one hundred and fifty.

In the interests of Moscow's defences, the stone Kitai Gorod wall and gate towers were erected in 1535 (architect: Petrok Maly). This wall divided the trading centre from the rest of the city, joining it to the Kremlin on the eastern side. The remains of this wall and some of the gates (Tretyakovsky Proezd) can still be seen in the centre of Moscow today. The Kitai Gorod wall formed a second ring of fortifications around the Kremlin. Half a century later two more rings of fortifications were built: the Bely Gorod (White Town-1585-91; archi­tect: Feodor Kon), and the Zemlyanoi Gorod or Skorodom 1591) which further consolidated the radial ring-shaped plan of Moscow. The wall of the Bely Gorod was erected along the line of the present Boulevard ring road. It was built of brick with many "blind" towers and dozens of gated towers opening onto Moscow's radial streets. The fortifications of the Zemlyanoi Gorod ran along the line of the present Sadovoye Koltso (Gar­den Ring Road) and were about sixteen kilometres in length. A wooden wall with 34 gates was built on the high Zemlyanoi rampart, and about one hundred blind towers.

A new, national style of architecture began to emerge in sixteenth-century Moscow, drawing upon the folk wooden architecture. The creation and development of stone churches of the "pillar" and "tent-roof" type is the most remarkable phenomenon in sixteenth cen­tury church building. Among such churches are the Cathedral of the Intercession on the moat (the church of St Basil the Blessed—Vasili Blazhenny-built by the Russian architects Postnik, Yakovlev and Barma), the church of St Antipy, the Cathedral of the Convent of the Nativity (Rozhdestvensky), and the Church of St Nicetas (Nikita chto za Yauzoi).

The Russian architecture flourished anew in the seventeenth century. The style known as Moscow Baroque (the Naryshkin style) appeared. The soaring movement of these stone churches, with their multiple pillars and intricate detail gave them a quite new look of lightness and airiness. The most outstanding monuments in the Naryshkin style are the Church of the Intercession of the Virgin in Fili and the Upper Petrovsky Monastery, which was rebuilt.

Most of the buildings in seventeenth-century Moscow were built of wood. However, the boyars' mansions, the courtiers' homes, and the churches were more and more frequently of stone: the Church of the Nativity in Putinki (1652, on Chekhov Street), the ensemble of the Upper Petrovsky Monastery (end of the seventeenth century, on Petrovka Street), the Trinity Church in Nikitniki (end of the seventeenth century, near Old Square-Staraya PJoshchad), the mansion of Boyar Vol-kov (seventeenth century, in Kharitoniev Lane) and others.

Most of the road surfaces in Moscow were made of wood; only those leading up to the Kremlin gates were cobbled. The Moscovites obtained drinking water from the rivers and streams, of which there were many in old Moscow.

Political upheavals and wars left their mark on the town. It was many times burnt down and rebuilt, each time gaining outstanding new buildings. After the fire of 1626 the Tsar issued an edict providing for the widen­ing of the streets and lanes in the Kremlin and the adjacent districts to 12-13 metres.

The Kremlin towers were decorated with peaked roofs, and a new clock appeared on the Barbican of St Frol (Spassky Gate). The moat running along the Kremlin wall was spanned by stone bridges across to Red Square.

The growth of Moscow and its population-resulted at the beginning of the seventeenth century in the setting up of two special establishments, the Zemskii Prikaz (the chief police and judicial office for the city of Mos­cow) and the Pushkarskii Prikaz (gunners' office), to take charge of improving the city and ensuring public order.

The planning of Moscow was mainly determined by the radial, circular system of building that had been formed. However, between the city's main arteries, the radial streets, infilling was haphazard.

Government construction work in Moscow was super­vised by an office that was specially created in the seventeenth century, the Prikaz Kamennikh Del (the Stone Work Office).

At the beginning of the eighteenth century the capital of the state was moved to St Petersburg. However, Moscow continued to be regarded as Russia's second capital and remained an extremely important political, economic and cultural centre. By that time the city had 16,357 households.

In the first quarter of the eighteenth century a number of planning edicts were issued by the government. Only the building of stone structures was permitted in the Kremlin, the Kitai Gorod and the Bely Gorod. Paving of the streets with cobblestones began.

Поиск по сайту: