The Typology of Settlements in Ramesside Middle Egypt. An Analysis of the Wilbour Papyrus

2019 ◽  
Vol 105 (1) ◽  
pp. 59-71
Author(s):  
Jean-Christophe Antoine

A statistical analysis of text A of the Wilbour Papyrus shows that the pattern of landholdings surrounding localities well reflects the population inhabiting settlements and allows their categorization without preconceived idea. The resulting typology fits only in part with classifications relying on administrative considerations, the central place theory or archeological criteria. Urban features are not limited to regional capitals. Main and secondary urban centers are distinguished by a hinterland of small localities; this hinterland is exclusive to each main urban center but shared in secondary urban centers. Small rural settlements are not homogenous and can be distinguished according to their agricultural activity, particularly cattle and horse breeding, and the locally predominant landholding institution.

2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (6) ◽  
pp. 1630 ◽  
Author(s):  
Xuedong Li ◽  
Yunhui Liu ◽  
Yajuan Chen ◽  
Pengyao Li ◽  
Zhenrong Yu

Rural decline caused by rapid urbanization is a global issue, and village regrouping is an effective way to revitalize the countryside. The eastern plains of China (EPC) were the first regions to implement the policy of village regrouping in China. Despite being one of the most critical factors in village regrouping, home-field distances (HFDs) in these areas have received little attention. In this study, we selected 240 sample points in the EPC through spatial stratified sampling, each of which is a square of 10 × 10 km2. Based on high-resolution remote sensing images, the inter-regional differences of rural settlements and home-field straight-line distances (HFLDs) in the EPC were systematically analyzed. Based on the central place theory (CPT), the influencing mechanism of the HFLD, the maximum HFLD acceptable to farmers, and the reasonable number, distribution pattern, and service scope of central villages in the EPC were further explored. The results indicate that HFLDs in the EPC have significant latitude zonality and spatial autocorrelation. In the northeastern China plain (NECP), north China plain (NCP), and middle and lower reaches plain of the Yangtze River (MLPYR), the ranges of the maximum HFLD are 1000–4000 m, 500–2200 m, and 500–1500 m, respectively. The distribution pattern of rural settlements, the traffic conditions, and the vehicles used by farmers during periods of land development directly impact the HFLD. HFLDs in the EPC should not exceed 3.6–4.2 km (NECP can use the higher standard-4.2 km, NCP and MLPYR can use the lower standard-3.6 km), the service range of each rural settlement should not exceed 33.6–45.8 km2, and the number of rural settlements per 100 km2 should be greater than three. The rural settlements should be discretely distributed so that each piece of farmland can be tended. The MLPYR demonstrates the greatest potential for village regrouping, and the Chinese government should invest more funds in village regrouping and central village construction in the MLPYR. This study can provide a case study for developing countries in the urbanization phase, so as to improve the rationality of village regrouping planning.


1991 ◽  
Vol 50 (1) ◽  
pp. 35-52 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel Little

The rational-choice paradigm has been attractive to many area specialists in their efforts to arrive at explanations of social and political behavior in various parts of the world. This model of explanation is simple yet powerful; we attempt to explain a pattern of social behavior or an enduring social arrangement as the aggregate outcome of the goal-directed choices of large numbers of rational agents. Why did the Nian rebellion occur? It was the result of the individual-level survival strategies of north China peasants (Perry 1980). Why did the central places of late imperial Sichuan conform to the hexagonal arrays predicted by central-place theory? Because participants—consumers, merchants, and officials—made rational decisions based on considerations of transport cost (Skinner 1964–65). Why was late imperial Chinese agriculture stagnant? Because none of the actors within the agricultural system had both the incentive and the capacity to invest in agricultural innovation (Lippit 1987).


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document