The myth and the stones of Venice: an historical geography of a symbolic landscape

John Ruskin's Stones of Venice criticized the Victorian city and Victorian society in the light of a reconstruction of medieval Venice. But Ruskin's reconstruction embodied elements of a long-standing myth propagated by Venetians themselves and inscribed in their organization of urban space and urban landscape. The geographical dimensions of the myth, its changing character through time, its iconographic expressions and its significance for English attitudes to Venice are described and explained. Ruskin used the myth to support his ideology, constructing a homology between architectural development and social structure. But the appeal of Venice transcends historical contingency and may, in part, be understood by reference to psychoanalytic categories, specifically sexual symbolism.     

Urbanism and economic development in a pre-industrial context: the case of southern Russia

Russia's southern frontier in the seventeenth century was continuously menaced by the nomadic Tatars who inhabited the open steppe grasslands. In this situation the Russian government attempted to harness all the frontier's sources to the cause of defence by founding a series of military towns which could control and direct the process of settlement. Government control, however, did not extend to the widespread illegal migration and settlement of runaway serfs. In a later period, as the Tatar threat subsided and colonization continued, the importance of most of the towns diminished and a system of secondary central places arose as trade expanded. But the oldest towns retained their importance in this changing social and economic situation, becoming higher-order central places for long-distance trade and, increasingly, centres for agricultural processing.