Przegląd Geograficzny (2016) vol. 88, iss. 4

The “double town” as a form of settlement

Robert Szmytkie

Przegląd Geograficzny (2016) vol. 88, iss. 4, pp. 511-531 | Full text
doi: https://doi.org/10.7163/PrzG.2016.4.5

The main aim of this article is to attempt to define the term “double town” as a form of settlement, and to order the terminology used in reference to this group of towns. Double towns are settlements created as a result of an administrative connection of two towns. In the literal meaning, they would be towns consisting of two elements with a town character (double towns sensu stricto). In a broader context, double towns may consist of more elements, among which two should be settlement units with a town character (double towns sensu largo). Double towns emerge via two stages, of which the first entails the creation of a concentration of towns (a bicentric agglomeration form), and the second a formal connection between the said of towns into one urban organism. The regress of double towns may in turn result from integration (a unification of spatial structure), disintegration (the gaining of administrative independence by elements of a double town), incorporation (a double town becomes part of another town/city), degradation (a loss of town privileges) or partial or total disappearance (total or partial abandonment of a town). In reference to the character of form of settlement, double towns can be divided into four groups : a) double towns in the narrow sense (sensu stricto): – with a twin layout, consisting of two towns of similar size and rank, e.g. Nowogród and Krzystkowice, Nowa Ruda and Słupiec, Kraśnik and Kraśnik Fabryczny; – with a satellite layout, where one town is considerably bigger than the other, e.g. Bełchatów and Grocholice, Sochaczew and Chodaków, Rawicz and Sarnowa. b) double towns in the broad sense (sensu largo): – with a twin layout, e.g. Czerwionka-Leszczyny, Lędziny and Hołdunów; – with a satellite layout, e.g. Zawiercie and Kromołów, Mielec and Rzochów. In the case of double towns’ functional layouts, five types can be distinguished when the towns are joined, i.e.: – double towns whose components have similar functions and constitute competing centres (usually focal centers of similar rank), e.g. Kórnik and Bnin; – double towns, whose components are specialised centres, as a result of their affiliation with a particular functional area (usually an industrial region), e.g. Nowa Ruda and Słupiec; – double towns whose components have diverse functions independent of each other as regards the functional aspect, e.g. Władysławowo and Jastrzębia Góra; – double towns with two components of disparate rank, despite their functional types (the larger town usually serving as a district centre, the smaller as the administrative centre of the local-authority area or gmina), e.g. Rawicz and Sarnowa; – double towns with an interurbation character – a settlement group whose elements have different and mutually supplemental functions (with one town being a focal centre while the other is a specialised centre), e.g. Kraśnik and Kraśnik Fabryczny.

Keywords: miasta podwójne, miasta-zlepieńce, zmiany administracyjne miast, Polska

Robert Szmytkie [robert.szmytkie@uwr.edu.pl], Uniwersytet Wrocławski, Instytut Geografii i Rozwoju Regionalnego

Citation

APA: Szmytkie, R. (2016). Miasto podwójne jako forma osadnicza. Przegląd Geograficzny, 88(4), 511-531. https://doi.org/10.7163/PrzG.2016.4.5

MLA: Szmytkie, Robert. "Miasto podwójne jako forma osadnicza". Przegląd Geograficzny, vol. 88, no. 4, 2016, pp. 511-531. https://doi.org/10.7163/PrzG.2016.4.5

Chicago: Szmytkie, Robert. "Miasto podwójne jako forma osadnicza". Przegląd Geograficzny 88, no. 4 (2016): 511-531. https://doi.org/10.7163/PrzG.2016.4.5

Harvard: Szmytkie, R. 2016. "Miasto podwójne jako forma osadnicza". Przegląd Geograficzny, vol. 88, no. 4, pp. 511-531. https://doi.org/10.7163/PrzG.2016.4.5