Neoliberal Urban Governance.

Spaces,
Culture and Discourses in Buenos
Aires and Chicago Carolina Sternberg
Visit to download the full and correct content document:
https://ebookmass.com/product/neoliberal-urban-governance-spaces-culture-and-disc
ourses-in-buenos-aires-and-chicago-carolina-sternberg/
More products digital (pdf, epub, mobi) instant
download maybe you interests ...

New Urban Spaces: Urban Theory and the Scale Question

Neil Brenner

https://ebookmass.com/product/new-urban-spaces-urban-theory-and-
the-scale-question-neil-brenner/

Neoliberal Education and the Redefinition of Democratic

Practice in Chicago 1st ed. Edition Kendall A. Taylor

https://ebookmass.com/product/neoliberal-education-and-the-
redefinition-of-democratic-practice-in-chicago-1st-ed-edition-
kendall-a-taylor/

City Living: How Urban Spaces and Urban Dwellers Make

One Another Quill R. Kukla

https://ebookmass.com/product/city-living-how-urban-spaces-and-
urban-dwellers-make-one-another-quill-r-kukla/

Modernization and urban water governance :

organizational change and sustainability in Europe
Bolognesi

https://ebookmass.com/product/modernization-and-urban-water-
governance-organizational-change-and-sustainability-in-europe-
bolognesi/
Water Insecurity and Water Governance in Urban Kenya:
Policy and Practice Anindita Sarkar

https://ebookmass.com/product/water-insecurity-and-water-
governance-in-urban-kenya-policy-and-practice-anindita-sarkar/

The Rise of Victimhood Culture: Microaggressions, Safe

Spaces, and the New Culture Wars Campbell

https://ebookmass.com/product/the-rise-of-victimhood-culture-
microaggressions-safe-spaces-and-the-new-culture-wars-campbell/

Mega-Events and Legacies in Post-Metropolitan Spaces:

Expos and Urban Agendas 1st Edition Stefano Di Vita

https://ebookmass.com/product/mega-events-and-legacies-in-post-
metropolitan-spaces-expos-and-urban-agendas-1st-edition-stefano-
di-vita/

Urban Food Democracy and Governance in North and South

1st ed. 2020 Edition Alec Thornton

https://ebookmass.com/product/urban-food-democracy-and-
governance-in-north-and-south-1st-ed-2020-edition-alec-thornton/

Urbanization and Urban Governance in China: Issues,

Challenges, and Development 1st Edition Lin Ye (Eds.)

https://ebookmass.com/product/urbanization-and-urban-governance-
in-china-issues-challenges-and-development-1st-edition-lin-ye-
eds/
Neoliberal Urban
Governance
Spaces, Culture and Discourses
in Buenos Aires and Chicago

Carolina Sternberg
Neoliberal Urban Governance
 Carolina Sternberg

Neoliberal Urban
Governance
Spaces, Culture and Discourses in Buenos Aires
and Chicago
Carolina Sternberg
Department of Latin American
and Latino Studies
DePaul University
Chicago, IL, USA

ISBN 978-3-031-21717-3 ISBN 978-3-031-21718-0 (eBook)

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-21718-0

© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer
Nature Switzerland AG 2023
This work is subject to copyright. All rights are solely and exclusively licensed by the
Publisher, whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights
of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on
microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and
retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology
now known or hereafter developed.
The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc.
in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such
names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for
general use.
The publisher, the authors, and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and informa-
tion in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither
the publisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, expressed or implied, with
respect to the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been
made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps
and institutional affiliations.

Cover illustration: © Alex Linch shutterstock.com

This Palgrave Macmillan imprint is published by the registered company Springer Nature
Switzerland AG
The registered company address is: Gewerbestrasse 11, 6330 Cham, Switzerland
To the ‘Sternbergers’ and Tiago
Past, present and future
 Preface

As a social scientist, I am interested in understanding how space, govern-

ment, and state structure and policy affect urban marginality. My perspec-
tive has been shaped by growing up in Buenos Aires and receiving my
bachelor’s degree in geography and my master’s degree in public policy.
In 2006, I arrived at the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign to
pursue a Ph.D. in urban geography, hoping to expand the focus and
geographical context of my research. Aware of my roots and training in
the Global South, my academic advisor, David Wilson, encouraged me to
embark on a comparative study of neoliberal governance in Buenos Aires
and Chicago. The project drew me not just because it allowed me to make
sense of these two different parts of the world, but because it offered
a way to bridge gaps between the academic traditions in urban studies
between the Global North and the Global South. This book is part of
that journey, one that began after I was transplanted in the Midwest, one
that flourished while I was in graduate school, and one that to this day
has me dissecting differences and similarities between neoliberal urban
governance in Buenos Aires and Chicago.
Both Buenos Aires and Chicago have reputations as cities marked by
stark social and economic contrasts between the cities’ north and the
south sides. Both cities have been described as “two cities in one.” Buenos
Aires’s south side is widely considered one of the most neglected areas
in the city, marked by decades of disinvestment, while the north side
is regarded as privileged and well-served. Chicago’s southwest side still

vii
viii PREFACE

endures an imaginary in which it is disinvested, poor, and crime-ridden,

while the north side represents prosperity, vibrancy, and safety.
Reporters, urban scholars, and government officials have accepted the
grand simplification of both cities. Yet the broad characterizations say too
little about the historical legacies, political culture, institutional trajec-
tory, and economic structures that have shaped each city. People using
these generalizations are often part of a neoliberal governance structure
that relies on such imagery to pursue particular aims. They are often
not interested in better understanding the two cities’ stark contrasts and
inequalities. In this book, I examine the dynamics and place-based nature
of neoliberal urban governance in Chicago and Buenos Aires, which
largely explains the two cities’ stark contrasts and inequalities. Few studies
have been conducted that explore neoliberal urban governances in urban
settings on different continents.
Thus, the purpose of this book is twofold: to present a different story,
one of a nuanced vision of neoliberal urban governance that continues
evolving and is humanly constituted, and to contribute to the existing
literature in critical urban studies on the troubling impact of neoliberal
ideology across cities. As critical urban scholars, we need to continue
exploring neoliberalism’s many facets, interruptions, and shapes across the
world and in comparative perspective, to be able to tell the story about
this multitextured and restless social formation.

Chicago, USA Carolina Sternberg

 Acknowledgments

I have been very fortunate to have benefitted from the guidance, encour-
agement, and support of numerous colleagues, family, friends (human and
furry) while writing this book.
This book owes much to all who contributed to bringing dreams of
this project to reality. My first agent at Palgrave Macmillan/Springer
Nature, Elizabeth Graber, for her encouragement of this project; my
book coach and developmental editor Molly Mullin for her unwavering
support; and the University Research Council, the Late Stage Faculty
Research Grant and the Center for Latino Research Fellowship at DePaul
University for financially supporting my research and writing.
I am also indebted to all my interviewees from Buenos Aires, including,
Lucrecia Bertelli, Soledad Arqueros, Pablo Vitale, and Eduardo (El
Hormiguero) for their generous time and patience; Florencia Rivolta and
Danilo Rossi, at the time staff members of the former Secretary of
Social and Urban Integration from the City of Buenos Aires government
(GCBA); Tomas Galmarini, current Director of Unidad de Proyectos
Especiales Urbanización Barrio Padre Carlos Mugica from the GCBA.
In Chicago, my compañeros of Juntos por la Villita, Teresa Gonzalez, and
John Betancur have also enriched this book with their valuable insights
and critical comments derived from their extensive community work.
My sincere thanks to my wonderful colleagues and friends at DePaul
University, Lourdes, Billy, and Delia for their immense professional and
emotional support. In this long journey, my family Enrique, Marta,

ix
x ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Gabriela, and Sofia, and my close friends, Nuria, Vicky, Paula, Andrea,
Mónica, and Betsy, have been forever present.
I am also thankful to my furry monster female cat, Malena, and her
nemesis, Indiana, my sweet Brazilian Border Collie. Both have given
me the calm, energy, and joy I needed along this process. My sincere
thanks and appreciation to my Zumba instructor, Sarah, and her partner,
Jill, who have shown me how to “dance” every sentence, every Sunday
morning. I also extend my appreciation to my therapist Mihaela who has
helped me go through a rollercoaster of emotions and frustrations during
the pandemic and more.
Finally, I thank my dearest life companion, Tiago Tel, who supports
me unconditionally, and reminds me to drink coffee to change the things
that I can, and to drink wine to accept the things that I cannot change.
 Contents

1 Introduction 1
2 Redevelopment Frontiers in Buenos Aires 27
3 Becoming a “Socially Integrated City” Through
“Creative Districts” 45
4 From Villa to Barrio 69
5 Neoliberal Governance and Chicago’s Southwest Side 105
6 Chicago’s Southwest Redevelopment Frontier: Pilsen
and Little Village 125
7 An Inclusive and Equitable New Chicago? 159
8 Conclusion: Comparing the Urban Governances
of Chicago and Buenos Aires 179

Index 199

xi
 About the Author

Carolina Sternberg is an Associate Professor of Latin American and

Latino Studies and Critical Ethnic Studies at DePaul University. She
obtained her Ph.D. in Geography from the University of Illinois at
Urbana-Champaign and received her M.A. in Geography from the
Universidad de Buenos Aires in Argentina. Her main areas of research
and teaching combine urban studies, domestic workers, Latin Amer-
ican studies, and local urban politics in both US and Latin American
settings. Her most recent publications examine race and gentrification
in Latino/a/x and African American communities in Chicago, the fluid
and evolving nature of neoliberal urban governance in the US and Latin
American urban settings, and feminist ethics of care in Buenos Aires.

xiii
 List of Figures

Fig. 3.1 a Map of the Arts District. b Map of La Boca, San Telmo,
and Barrio 31 (Source Elaborated by GIS specialist, Julio
Villarino) 46
Fig. 3.2 Usina de las Artes (Source Photo taken by the author) 51
Fig. 3.3 Riachuelo river, La Boca (Source Photo taken
by the author) 55
Fig. 3.4 La Boca neighborhood (Source Photo taken by the author) 56
Fig. 3.5 Caminito and Vuelta de Rocha (Source Photo taken
by the author) 57
Fig. 4.1 Panoramic view of Barrio 31 (Source Courtesy
of the Secretary for Social and Urban Integration,
SECISyU, City Government of Buenos Aires) 70
Fig. 4.2 View of corrugated sheet metal and scavenged-brick
houses in Barrio 31 (Source Courtesy of Pablo Vitale) 73
Fig. 4.3 Panoramic view of former Villa 31, showing stark contrast
with the wealthy neighborhood of Retiro (Source Courtesy
of Pablo Vitale) 74
Fig. 4.4 Before renovations (housing and infrastructure), unpaved
streets and electric cables crossing the streets (Source
Courtesy of Pablo Vitale) 75
Fig. 4.5 Houses were stacked so high that their roofs
scraped the underside of the road (Source Courtesy
of the Secretary for Social and Urban Integration
SECISyU, City Government of Buenos Aires) 84

xv
xvi LIST OF FIGURES

Fig. 4.6 Barrio 31 emerging: New housing built (Source Courtesy

of the Secretary for Social and Urban Integration
SECISyU, City Government of Buenos Aires) 89
Fig. 4.7 Barrio 31 emerging: Housing improved, new streets built,
and sanitation installed (Source Courtesy of the Secretary
for Social and Urban Integration SECISyU, City
Government of Buenos Aires) 90
Fig. 5.1 Map of Chicago Latino/a/x neighborhoods: Pilsen
and Little Village (Source Elaborated by GIS specialist,
Julio Villarino) 107
Fig. 6.1 Pilsen, before and after gentrification (Source Photo taken
by the author) 129
Fig. 7.1 View of the Crawford Power Plant (before being
demolished) Courtesy of Little Village Environmental
Justice Organization (LVEJO) 170
Fig. 7.2 Flyer distributed on September 16, 2020, against
the closing of the discount mall in Little village (Source
Photo taken by the author) 173
 List of Tables

Table 3.1 Price of land in La Boca and San Telmo 61

Table 6.1 Pilsen and Little Village socioeconomic conditions
over time 127
Table 6.2 Cook County house price index (January 2000 through
June 2021) 148
Table 6.3 Small-unit building stock vs. multi-unit building stock
over time in Pilsen 148
Table 6.4 Small-unit building stock vs. multi-unit building stock
over time in Little Village 149
Table 8.1 City of Chicago. Neoliberal governance policies
and programs, redevelopment agenda, and rhetoric 184
Table 8.2 City of Buenos Aires. Neoliberal governance policies
and programs, redevelopment agenda, and rhetoric 186

xvii
 CHAPTER 1

Introduction

In February 2016, one of Spain’s leading newspapers, El País, published

a story about Villa 31, one of the biggest slums in the center of the city
of Buenos Aires, with this headline: “The misery that is impossible to
hide in the center of Buenos Aires” (La Nación 2017). Paradoxically, in
October of the same year, that headline became an opportunity for the
mayor of Buenos Aires, Rodríguez Larreta, to announce a monumental
redevelopment plan that would profoundly change the city’s social fabric
and urban form: the urbanization of Villa 31 and its social integration
with the rest of the city.1 At the Habitat III Regional Conference held
in Ecuador in 2016, Rodriguez Larreta explained: “I want an integrated
city, in which everyone can have the same rights and responsibilities... a
city without slums, integrated from north to south” (La Nación 2016,
my translation). This urban plan—incomplete at the time of writing—has
become the central pillar of Buenos Aires’s urban redevelopment agenda.
In September 2012, during his second year as mayor of Chicago, and
as part of a commitment to revitalize “underutilized” lands and former
industrial areas on the city’s southwest side, Rahm Emanuel publicly
announced that he aimed to: “‘Return these areas to active, productive

1 Briefly, urbanization means formalizing housing tenure and incorporating informal

settlements into the domains of existing public services. Improving social integration
means reducing inequalities and divisions and promoting quality interaction and a sense
of belonging in diverse social environments (Lindquist 2021).

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature 1

Switzerland AG 2023
C. Sternberg, Neoliberal Urban Governance,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-21718-0_1
2 C. STERNBERG

use for the residents of the Pilsen and Little Village neighborhoods. This
(…) is an important step toward creating jobs and a healthy environment
for these communities’” (in Scalzitti 2012). Emanuel’s announcement
marked the beginning of a series of redevelopment projects aimed at phys-
ically and socially transforming the historically disinvested communities of
Pilsen and Little Village.
These mayoral announcements inaugurated a new phase of urban
development for each city, but most importantly, they revealed a new
era of redevelopment in historically and deeply stigmatized areas. Despite
decades of disinvestment in Buenos Aires’s center and south side and in
Chicago’s southwest side, to governance actors, acres of property parcels
and land (especially in the slums of Buenos Aires) now seem ripe for a
new phase of urban restructuring. Long-time area residents neglected
for decades by public and private funds in both city areas now face a
wave of transformation—social as well as physical. Chicago’s Pilsen and
Little Village and Buenos Aires’s La Boca, San Telmo, and Villa 31 are
areas in critical need of being drawn into the social fabric and the real
estate market of each city. In particular, since the 1970s Pilsen and Little
Village have struggled with poverty as a result of structural racism and
overall social, physical, and economic disinvestment. In Buenos Aires, La
Boca and San Telmo have suffered physical and economic neglect since
the 1980s. Villa 31 has historically been cast as an “eyesore of the city”
because of its considerable neglect, poverty, and marginalization.
In this book, I consider how the physical and social transformation
of these areas is unfolding. I examine how neoliberal urban governances
in Chicago and Buenos Aires—institutions, programs, and procedures—
work to advance particular redevelopment agendas in a drive to transform
previously disinvested and stigmatized neighborhoods.
Chicago and Buenos Aires have been experiencing increasing urban
gentrification that is carried out as official government policy. In both
cities, neoliberal governance actors—driven by market-oriented goals
rather than distributive ones—are exercising new power to upscale
targeted blocks in the most neglected and stigmatized areas. In other
words, neoliberal governance in each urban setting has moved into an
uncharted terrain of impoverished and deeply stigmatized communities.
Yet, how neoliberal governances in both cities currently operate as they
 1 INTRODUCTION 3

move into these new areas remains unexplored by comparative critical

urban studies literature.2
Notably, this new phase of redevelopment is not merely a decisive
and determined urban project but the result of something humanly
and adroitly crafted among an assemblage of actors: city officials, local
boards, developers, architects, and real estate agents. I propose that
Chicago’s and Buenos Aires’s neoliberal urban governances are doing
more than simply producing and rationalizing new policies and proce-
dures. These formations must work through visions of the city, its
institutions, its people, and communities, whose impoverishment, stigma,
and institutional neglect—the governances suggest—are obstacles to a
successful urban transformation. In this context, I ask: How do neolib-
eral urban governances in Chicago and Buenos Aires unfold their urban
plans for transformation while responding to changing political reali-
ties, contestation, growing inequalities, and obstacles to development
and redevelopment? How do these formations adjust to the ongoing
contestation they face in advancing redevelopment? What kind of spaces
(material and imagined) and cultural understandings do these actors seek
to build across Chicago and Buenos Aires? Finally, I consider how, with
the encroaching commodification of urban spaces and landscapes, people
living in these formerly neglected areas face new challenges, including the
threat of displacement.
Central to my endeavor is a consideration of how neoliberal urban
governance in both cities deploys rhetoric to build acceptance, dissuade
resistance, and normalize the commodification of the targeted areas. That
rhetoric includes metaphors, common understandings, imagined spaces,
and sanitary codes. For an example of how neoliberal governance rhetoric
works, consider Chicago’s southwest side. For decades ignored or over-
looked for formal redevelopment, this area is now imagined and discussed
by city officials, real estate, and business leaders as what I term “pros-
perous and orderly ethnic spaces” (Pilsen) and “culturally rich multiethnic
spaces” (Little Village) as contributors to Chicago’s neoliberal globaliza-
tion efforts. Similarly, the center (Villa 31) and south sides (La Boca

2 There are few examples of comparative urban studies that explore Latin American
neoliberal urban governances, see, for example, Saad-Filho (2020), Springer et al. (2016),
and Kunkel and Mayer (2012). However, these studies do not address how neoliberal
governances work to advance redevelopment agendas in a drive to transform previously
stigmatized neighborhoods.
4 C. STERNBERG

and San Telmo) of Buenos Aires, also for decades, have been largely
neglected and overlooked for urban transformation. Yet, these areas in
Buenos Aires have been rediscovered as “cultural, touristic and versa-
tile artistic spaces” (La Boca and San Telmo); “livable, formalized, and
robust spaces” (Villa 31); and as contributors to Buenos Aires’s socio-
inclusive efforts. In addition, Villa 31 in Buenos Aires is now presented
as an opportunity for renovated “multi-cultural and gastronomic experi-
ences” in efforts to create more revenues for the city and new sources of
profits. Identifying these spaces and governances’ dominant goals, urban
agendas, and actions is important; they provide the frame to understand
the current southwest side and center-south side involvement. While
physically transforming these disinvested areas, neoliberal urban gover-
nances have also been cultivating positive identities in both cities. In the
case of Chicago, the governance has shaped Latinos/as/x experiences by
positively rendering them as, what I term, “ethnicity-infused beings.” In
Buenos Aires, the term “vecinos ” rather than “villeros/as ” has been used
to cultivate positive identities and encourage acceptance of the residents
of Villa 31.
The physical and social transformation of these areas in Chicago and
Buenos Aires is still highly uneven and continues to unfold in various
stages. To governance actors, these areas are in critical need of being
integrated in the social composition and real estate market of each city.
Rhetoric is fundamental to advancing these challenging urban projects.
How are these governances framing redevelopment in Buenos Aires and
Chicago around the sharp edges of the market? What are their strate-
gies—do they emphasize consensual and depoliticized language, mobilize
a large bureaucratic machine, or change their rhetoric to suit particular
contexts? I find that the rhetoric deployed—“as powerful as any physical
and social remaking” (Wilson 2018, p. 2)—makes possible both a phys-
ical transformation and commodification of both Chicago’s southwest and
Buenos Aires’s center-south sides.
Central to this process, neoliberal governance rhetoric in Chicago and
Buenos Aires, along with policies and redevelopment projects, reflects
specific race and class identities and anxieties. Following Wilson (2007,
2018), Derickson (2017), Bonilla-Silva (2013), and Mele (2013), I
consider how race and class shape the production of governance core
processes and rhetoric. Racialization and class making, and their inte-
gration into economic processes, are often nuanced and subtle: we can
see them in situated meanings, expressions, and common understandings
 1 INTRODUCTION 5

about people and spaces (Wilson 2007). For example, “livable spaces,”
“orderly and clean neighborhoods,” “cultural and productive citizens,”
and “up-and-coming neighborhoods”—all these communicate both racial
and class constructs and imply that these spaces are made for particular
groups of people (Wilson 2018, p. 42). In other words, identifying a
governance’s redevelopment projects, policies, and rhetoric must be sensi-
tive to the production and use of race and class. Neoliberal governances’
rhetoric and actions along these new redevelopment frontiers have both
old and new racial and class roots; following Derickson (2017), we can
trace how they are embedded in ways that are often not immediately
apparent.
My goal is to question neoliberal urban governances as forceful assem-
blage of institutions when they advance their redevelopment projects.
When the mayors of Chicago and Buenos Aires announced their plans
in 2012 and 2016, they not only presented core urban agendas for
each governance, they communicated a sense of decisive and deter-
mined governances pushing their agendas forward. Such announcements
often marginalize instability, contradictions, struggle, and resistance to
redevelopment. In this book, I present a different kind of story, with
a complex vision of neoliberal urban governance. I contend that it is
crucial to nuance the official stories, recognizing that governances contin-
uously adjust to shifting social, political, and economic circumstances as
they plan and advance their projects across cities and neighborhoods. I
show that to advance redevelopment, while leaving unresolved some very
real dilemmas faced by residents and policymakers, governances mobilize
persuasive and powerful discourse deployed by city officials, local boards,
developers, architects, and real estate agents.
I argue also that governances that share a common neoliberal frame-
work operate distinctively in particular locations: they are significantly
different entities as locally grounded formations. Neoliberal urban gover-
nances are constituted in the richness of particular localities, where
they are mediated by distinctive socio-political institutions, institution-
alized practices, cultures, and economic realities. As I discuss in the
comparative analysis presented in Chapter 8, each local neoliberal gover-
nance advances processes of redevelopment and growth in a locally
specific way. Each formation—locally constituted and humanly crafted—
uses distinctive rhetoric (metaphors, common understandings, imagined
spaces, sanitary codes), programs, and policies.
6 C. STERNBERG

Currently, comparative research on the locally grounded nature of

neoliberal urban governance has predominantly addressed North Amer-
ican cities in comparison with cities in Europe, South Africa, and Asia
(Springer et al. 2016; Kunkel and Mayer 2012; Leitner et al. 2007).
Few comparative studies exist that feature Latin American cities (Saad-
Filho 2020; Kunkel and Mayer 2012; Kanai and Ortega-Alcaráz 2009).
Chicago and Buenos Aires are both large and globally connected world
cities3 that have not been previously examined comparatively, nor have
the dynamics of their governances.
At the structural level, Chicago’s and Buenos Aires’s urban gover-
nances may be seen as engaged in similar efforts: to entrepreneurialize
government actions, create more responsible and business-oriented citi-
zens, build a strong local business climate, and fashion a globally compet-
itive, consumption-oriented city (Hackworth 2007; Bennett 2006). But if
we focus on the nature of evolving places, “we see a patchwork of wildly
varying neoliberal governances that often barely resemble each other”
(Wilson 2004, p. 772).
In this context, this book contributes to a growing comparative
perspective on this type of governance, analyzing two world cities with
different urban, historical, and political trajectories, drawing on scholarly
traditions from the Global South and Global North (Robinson 2016).

Perspective and Definitions

Cultural Economy
I use a cultural economy framework that closely follows David Wilson’s
approach (2007) to understanding these sorts of governances. Wilson
emphasizes that economic processes do not operate in a cultural vacuum

3 There appears to be a consensus that cities and the dynamics of urbanization have
been changed by the intensification of global processes. Sassen (2002 [1991]) describes
“global cities” as the command and control centers for economic, political, and cultural
globalization. Urban studies scholars, including Benton-Short et al. (2005), have largely
defined global or world cities as major sites for the accumulation of capital, command
points in the world economy, headquarters for corporations, and important hubs of global
transportation and communication. While there are many limitations and biases to this
definition (e.g., cities concentrated in the Global North are seen as the most networked
or most highly ranked compared to the Global South), for the purpose of this study, I
will follow Benton-Short and colleagues’ (2005) definition to characterize both Buenos
Aires and Chicago as global cities.
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
The Project Gutenberg eBook of An account
of the principalities of Wallachia and
Moldavia
This ebook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United
States and most other parts of the world at no cost and with
almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away
or re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License
included with this ebook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you
are not located in the United States, you will have to check the
laws of the country where you are located before using this
eBook.

Title: An account of the principalities of Wallachia and Moldavia

Author: William Wilkinson

Release date: July 25, 2022 [eBook #68612]

Language: English

Original publication: United Kingdom: Longman, Hurst, Rees,

Orme, and Brown, 1820

Credits: Richard Tonsing and the Online Distributed

Proofreading Team at https://www.pgdp.net (This book
was produced from images made available by the
HathiTrust Digital Library.)

*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK AN

ACCOUNT OF THE PRINCIPALITIES OF WALLACHIA AND
MOLDAVIA ***
Transcriber’s Note:
The cover image was created by the transcriber
and is placed in the public domain.
 AN

ACCOUNT
OF

THE PRINCIPALITIES
OF

WALLACHIA AND MOLDAVIA:

WITH

VARIOUS POLITICAL OBSERVATIONS

RELATING TO THEM.

By WILLIAM WILKINSON, Esq.

LATE BRITISH CONSUL RESIDENT AT BUKOREST.

Dobbiamo considerare queste due provincie, Wallachia e Moldavia a

guisa di due nave in un mar’ tempestoso, dove-rare volte si gode la
tranquilita e la calma. Delchiaro—Revoluxione di Wallachia.

LONDON:
PRINTED FOR LONGMAN, HURST, REES, ORME, AND BROWN,
PATERNOSTER-ROW.
1820.
Printed by Strahan and Spottiswoode,
Printers-Street, London.
 PREFACE.

Amongst the nations of Europe most given to letters, none have so

largely contributed to the general list of publications, relating to the
condition and progress of the different countries of the world, as the
English; and no travellers possess to the same degree as they do the
love of describing them, however numerous the accounts that have
preceded the period of their own experimental observations. Their
journals, nevertheless, hardly ever fail to create interest, and the
least share of novelty in form or matter induces the less travelling
class of their countrymen to read them with pleasure.
Turkey and Egypt in particular have long been favourite themes;
and indeed the Ottoman empire in every point of view, whether
topographical, historical, administrative, religious, moral, political,
military, or commercial, offers an inexhaustible subject for
investigation, and an endless excitement to curiosity. No regular and
minute description has, however, yet been undertaken of two of its
most important and curious provinces, those which divide the
principal part of the ancient kingdom of Dacia, under the modern
denomination of Wallachia and Moldavia, although in the renewed
existence of Greek governments exercising most of the prerogatives
of independency, in the struggles of two nations between a strong
remnant of Dacian barbarism and the influence of modern
civilisation, and in a country comprehending within its own
boundaries all the productive resources which fall but separately to
the share of other countries, sufficient matter may be found to
render them a subject by no means unworthy of notice.
These considerations have encouraged me to write the following
pages with the view of laying them before the public. An official
residence of some years in the principalities of Wallachia and
Moldavia, afforded me the most ample opportunities of observation
on every thing they contain most interesting, and I have endeavoured
to make an accurate and satisfactory description of them. With
regard to their history, I have only dwelt upon the most remarkable
events, and have merely given it that extent to which its degree of
importance seems entitled. I was apprehensive that longer and more
minute details might be found tedious and unnecessary.
I regret, however, that at the time I wrote this account, I was not
sufficiently prepared to enter into further particulars with respect to
the minerals with which those countries abound; I intend, if I return
to them, to bestow as much attention as possible to that particular
object, and to make it the subject of a future separate treatise.
I am aware that my present undertaking is deserving of an abler
pen; but as the character of nations can only be properly understood
after some length of residence among them, I trust that the
circumstances which place it to my lot, will make the apology of my
intrusion, and become a motive of indulgence to its deficiencies in
literary merit.
As Wallachia was the country of my fixed residence, I naturally
chose it for the principal scene of my observations; and indeed the
history of the two principalities is throughout so intimately
connected, the form of their respective governments, the language,
manners, and customs of the inhabitants, have ever been so much
alike, that a description of the one renders a distinct account of the
other superfluous.
The political importance to which these two provinces have risen
since the reign of the ambitious Catherine, has given them a place of
no small consequence in the general balance of Europe. Most of the
European cabinets keep an eye upon them from the same motives,
though with different views; but politics alone have hitherto brought
them into notice, and philosophically or philanthropically speaking,
it must be confessed that a share of attention, directed by common
justice and humanity, was equally due to their definitive fate.
I have taken an opportunity of introducing into my appendix, a
very curious account of the military system of the Ottoman empire,
translated from a Turkish manuscript by an English gentleman, who
possesses a perfect knowledge of that language, and who has
favoured me with it. I have added to it some explanatory notes,
rendered necessary by the metaphorical, and in many parts, obscure
style of the original writing, and which my friend has purposely
translated in a literal sense, in order not to divest it of that originality
of narration which constitutes a great share of its interest.
The work was written in 1804, by order of the then reigning
Sultan, Selim III., with the view of explaining the important
advantages of the new military institution, called Nizam-y-Gedid, by
which the Ottoman armies were trained into a regular form of
discipline.
This institution, however necessary, and although strongly
supported by all the higher classes, was so violently opposed by the
clamorous janissaries, that at length it became impossible to
continue it, and since the year 1805, the former regulations, or rather
irregularities, have again been prevalent in the Ottoman armies. The
same disorders which the Turkish author so faithfully describes as
having existed before the introduction of the Nizam-y-Gedid, have
necessarily followed its abolishment, and Turkey will no longer trust
to her own means for salvation in future war. Her last one with
Russia has made her feel but too sensibly how far the present form of
discipline of her armies may prove fatal to her existence, if ever she is
abandoned to herself for defence.
CONTENTS.
 CHAPTER I.

Geographical position and extent of Wallachia and Moldavia—historical Page

remarks from the decline of the Dacians to the last century 1

CHAPTER II.

Inauguration of the Hospodars.—Present form of government.—Local

laws.—Tribunals of justice.—Members of the divan, and other public
functionaries.—Districts.—Caïmacam of Crayova.—Ispravniks. 46

CHAPTER III.

Population.—Tribute and taxes.—Other branches of revenue.—

Metropolitan dignity.—Monasteries. 60

CHAPTER IV.

Gold and silver mines.—Productions.—Restrictions on their

exportations.—Navigation of the Danube.—Trade of importation. 72

CHAPTER V.

Bukorest and Tirgovist, the capitals of Wallachia.—Yassi, the capital of

Moldavia.—A description of them.—Mode of travelling.—Breed of
horses. Page 86

CHAPTER VI.

Observations on the Greeks in general.—Their introduction to the 95

government of the principalities.—Their political system.—Causes of
the declaration of war between England and Russia, and Turkey in
1806.—Those which occasioned the failure of the English expedition
 to Constantinople.—Subsequent change of policy of the Ottoman
government.—Peace with England.—Peace with Russia, and
circumstances which mostly contributed to it.—Hospodars, Callimacki
and Caradja.—Prince Demetrius Mourousi’s death.—Caradja’s flight
from Wallachia.—Reflections on the conduct of the Porte relative to
the two principalities.

CHAPTER VII.

Climate—its influence.—Education of the Boyars.—Schools.—Wallachian

tongue.—Modern Greek.—National dress, music, and dance.—
Amusements.—Holidays.—Manners of society.—Marriages.—
Divorces.—Religion and superstition.—Authority of the church—its
independence of the patriarchal church of Constantinople. 126

CHAPTER VIII.

Peasants.—their manners and mode of living.—Emigrations.—

Agriculture.—General aspect of the country.—An account of the
Gypsies Page 155

CHAPTER IX.

Intercourse of foreigners.—Foreign consuls.—How far the natives are

benefited by their intercourse with foreign residents. 177

General Observations on the Political Positions of the

Principalities 187

Appendix 199
 AN ACCOUNT

OF

THE PRINCIPALITIES

OF

WALLACHIA AND MOLDAVIA.

 CHAPTER I.
GEOGRAPHICAL POSITION AND EXTENT
OF WALLACHIA AND MOLDAVIA—
HISTORICAL REMARKS FROM THE
DECLINE OF THE DACIANS TO THE LAST
CENTURY.

The principalities of Wallachia and Moldavia, situated between 43°

40′ and 48° 50′ north latitude, 23° and 29° 30′ east longitude,
occupying a space of 350 miles in length, and 160 in breadth, are
separated from the Austrian provinces of Temesvar, Transylvania,
and Boukovina, by the Carpathian mountains; from Russia, by the
river Pruth; and from Bulgaria (the ancient Mœsia), by the Danube.
It is sufficiently ascertained that these two provinces, joined to
those of Transylvania and Temesvar, composed the kingdom of
Dacia, finally conquered by the Romans.
The Dacians were originally a Scythian or Sarmatian tribe,
resembling, in language and manners, the Thracians; the Greeks,
indeed, considered them as a part of the Thracian nation.
They were a sober and vigorous people, capable of enduring any
hardships and privations in war: they did not fear exposing
themselves to the greatest dangers, because they looked upon death
as the beginning of a much happier life; and this doctrine, according
to Strabo, they held from a philosopher named Zamolxis, who was
held in high repute by them.
The progress of the Roman arms, which, under the reign of
Augustus, were carried to the banks of the Danube, brought them
into contact with the Dacians, who were at that time governed by a
warlike prince named Bærebestes, who boldly set the Roman
conquerors at defiance. After his death, they were divided into four
or five different principalities, and their strength was a good deal
broken by the Romans; but their last king Decebalus, one of the
ablest and most enterprising warriors of his time, re-united them
into one body towards the 87th year of the Christian æra.
The first irruption of the Dacians into the territory of the empire,
took place during the latter part of Augustus’s reign; and, at times
repulsed, at other times successful, they continued to annoy the
Romans without any decisive advantage taking place on either side.
At last the Emperor Domitian, determined to put a stop to their
depredations, marched in person against them.
The particulars of the war which ensued are sufficiently detailed in
the Roman history. The result of it having been such as to compel
Domitian to sue for peace; he consented to pay to Decebalus an
annual sum in the shape of a pension, but which, in fact, was nothing
less than a tribute. It was regularly paid by the Romans until the year
102, when the Emperor Trajan declared his resolution to discontinue
it; and the Dacians thereby considering themselves no longer bound
to observe the treaty of peace, crossed the Danube, and laid waste the
Roman territory. Upon these acts of hostility, Trajan put himself at
the head of a numerous army, and marching against them, forced
them to retire, passed the Danube in pursuit, engaged and defeated
their successive forces, and finally compelled Decebalus to
acknowledge himself his vassal. Trajan then returned to Rome,
where he received the honour of a triumph, and the title of Dacicus.
But not long after, Decebalus, eager to shake off the Roman yoke,
invaded and plundered the territory of his neighbours the Iazygæ,
who were also tributary to the empire, on their refusal to join him
against the Romans. Trajan again took the field at the head of a vast
army, determined to chastise and subdue the Dacians. He reached
the banks of the Danube in Autumn, and he thought it prudent to
wait there the return of the fine season, that he might carry on
military operations with more facility and success. It was during this
interval, that he caused his famous bridge to be built over the
Danube, under the direction of the architect Apollodorus of
Damascus; and its present remains are sufficiently visible to verify
the ancient accounts of this stupendous work. When the water is very
low, some of the piles stand two or three feet above it, and render
that part of the river difficult of navigation; they are looked upon as
rocks by the natives of each side.
 At the return of the Spring, when the bridge was completed, the
Roman army marched over it, and commenced hostilities. The war
was long and difficult, but it terminated in the complete subjugation
of the Dacians, and in the death of their king, Decebalus, who,
finding it impossible to avoid being made prisoner, killed himself
that he might not fall alive into the conquerors’ hands.
Dacia was thus converted into a Roman province, and Trajan
shortly after sent colonies to increase its population. New cities were
built, and pavements were constructed on the high roads, for the
greater facility of communication.[1] It was governed by a Roman pro-
prætor until the year 274.
Under the reign of Gallienus, when the empire was already
declining, various parts of Dacia were seized by the Goths, and other
barbarous nations.
A few Roman legions yet remained in the country, under the reign
of the Emperor Aurelian, who, returning from Gaul, came down to
Illyria, and finding a great part of Dacia in the hands of the
barbarians, foresaw the impossibility of maintaining any possessions
in the midst of them, and he withdrew a good number of the Roman
inhabitants to the other side of the Danube, and settled them in
Mæsia.
During the space of a hundred years from that period, those of the
natives who had remained behind, and their descendants, were
incessantly exposed to the rapacities of a variety of barbarous tribes,
who came into the country for plunder.
Towards the year 361, the Goths, more powerful than the rest,
seemed to have been left in exclusive possession of the province, and
were inclined to make a permanent stay in it. They embraced the
Christian religion, and established it in Dacia; since when, to the
present moment, it has never ceased to be predominant amongst its
inhabitants.
In 376, the Hunns, having over-run the countries possessed by the
Goths, forced Athanaric, King of the Vizigoths, to retire with all his
forces to that part of Dacia, situated between the rivers Dniester and
Danube, now called Moldavia. He raised a wall between the latter
river and the Pruth, by which he thought himself sufficiently
protected against the attacks of his enemies. The Hunns, however,
were not stopped by it; and their approach spread such
consternation among the Goths of the interior, that those who had
the means of escaping, to the number of some hundred thousand,
fled for refuge into the Roman territory, and were permitted by the
Emperor Valens, to settle in Thrace, upon condition that they should
live peaceably there, and serve, when required, in the Roman armies.
The Hunns having penetrated into Dacia, were left masters of it
until the year 453, when Ardaric, King of the Gepidæ, a people
previously conquered by Attila and the Hunns, revolted against
them, in consequence of Attila’s death. His son and successor, Ellach,
marched against them, but being defeated and slain, the Hunns were
driven back into Scythia, and the Gepidæ remained masters of all
Dacia. They entered into a sort of alliance with the Romans, who
agreed to pay them a pension. In 550, their first quarrels with their
neighbours, the Lombards, took place; and being sometimes assisted
by the Emperor Justinian, they carried on frequent hostilities against
them, for the space of eight years, at the end of which both nations
resolved to decide the fate of the war by one great battle. The
Lombards, under their King Alboin, had previously formed an
alliance with the Avars, a people of Scythian extraction; and, assisted
by them, they marched to action. Both sides fought with equal valor;
but at last victory declared in favour of the Lombards, who, pursuing
the Gepidæ, made a great slaughter among them. The Gepidæ, either
destroyed, dispersed, or subdued, never after had a king of their own,
and ceased to be a nation.
Alboin’s achievements in Dacia attracted the notice of Narses, sent
by Justinian to conquer Italy: he made offers to him, and finally
engaged him to join the expedition with all his forces. The Lombards
thus abandoned their possessions in Dacia and Pannonia to their
friends and neighbours the Avars. These, also known by the name of
White-Hunns, remained in them until their own destruction by the
Franks and Bulgarians. In the 7th century, being joined by other
barbarous tribes, they pushed their incursions as far as the gates of
Constantinople, where they were so completely defeated by the
Emperor Heraclius, that they could not recover the blow: it was the
original cause of their rapid decline.
Towards the close of the same century, a nation, known under the
names of Slaves and Bulgarians, came from the interior of Russia to
that part of Mæsia, which has since been called Bulgaria. Soon after a
great number of Slaves, headed by their chief Krumo, crossed the
Danube, and settled in Dacia, where they have since been known
under the name of Wallachs. Opinion varies with respect to the
origin of this name. Some historians pretend that the Slaves
distinguished by it the Romans of Mæsia; whilst others maintain that
they meant by it a people who led a pastoral life, and had given it to
the inhabitants of Mæsia, most of whom were shepherds; and that a
great number of these, having joined the Slaves in Dacia, the name
by degrees became a general one amongst its inhabitants. The
modern Wallachians, however, exclude it altogether from their
language, and call themselves “Rumunn” or Romans, giving to their
country the name of Roman-land, “Tsara-Rumaneska.”
Some former inhabitants of Dacia, joined by a number of Slaves
and Bulgarians, separated from the new settlers, and went to the
lower part of Dacia lying between the rivers Olt and Danube, where
they fixed their habitations. They formed themselves into a nation,
and chose for their chief one Bessarabba, to whom they gave the
Slavonic title of Bann or regent. The country within his jurisdiction
was called Bannat; and it retains to this day the name of Bannat of
Crayova, the latter being that of its present capital. Several other
petty independent states arose at the same time in various parts of
Dacia; but they were frequently annexed to the same sceptre, at other
periods dismembered, according to the warlike ardour or indolence
and incapacity of their various chiefs. Their general system, however,
consisted in making war against the Romans of the lower empire, in
which they were seconded by the Slaves and Bulgarians of Mæsia,
whom they looked upon as their natural allies. This state of things
continued to the close of the 9th century, at which period the Slaves
having fallen into decline, various hordes, originally Scythians,
successively undertook the conquest of Dacia, driving each other out
of it, according to the momentary superiority of the one over the
other. The most remarkable of these were the Hazars, the Patzinaces,
the Moangoures, the Ouzes, the Koumans, and other Tartars.
The natives were treated as slaves by all these hordes of barbarian
intruders, and great numbers of them were continually retiring to the
other side of the Carpathians; where they settled under their own
chiefs, sometimes independent, at others tributary to the kings of
Hungary. The most conspicuous and thriving of these colonies were
those of Fagarash and Maramosh.
The devastations continued in the plains finally drove out all the
natives, and in the 11th century the Tartars retired, leaving the
country a complete desert. It remained in this state until the year
1241, when the inhabitants of Fagarash, conducted by their chief
Raddo Negro (Rodolphus the Black), crossed the mountains, and
took possession of that tract of country, which is now called Upper
Wallachia. Nearly at the same time, the inhabitants of Maramosh
under their chief Bogdan, came and settled in that part which is by
some called Moldavia, from the name of the river Moldau, which
crosses it to fall into the Danube, and by the natives and Turks,
Bogdania. Raddo Negro and his followers halted at the foot of the
mountains, where they laid the foundation of a city, to which they
gave the name of Kimpolung. At present it is reduced to an
indifferent village; but its original extent is marked by old walls in
ruin; and some inscriptions in its cathedral church attest it to have
been Raddo’s capital. His successors transferred their residence to
Tirgovist, more pleasantly situated in the plains.
Some Wallachian, Transylvanian, and Hungarian authors differ in
opinion with respect to the exact period of Raddo’s and Bogdan’s
establishment in Wallachia and in Moldavia, and fix it at a different
year of the early part of the 13th century; but as they give no
satisfactory explanation on the subject, I am disposed to differ from
them all, in placing that event in the year 1241, on the strength of the
following considerations:—1st. It does not appear probable that the
kings of Hungary, who, at the commencement of the 13th century
were very powerful, and who looked upon Fagarash and Maramosh
as dependencies of their crown, would have suffered their
inhabitants to desert them, in order to settle in foreign countries:
2dly, It would seem strange that Raddo, Bogdan, and their followers
should have quitted their homes in a prosperous country, and come
to inhabit a desert, without some extraordinary event had
necessitated so remarkable an emigration: and 3dly, the best
Hungarian historians place in the year 1240 the invasion of Battou-
Han in the northern countries; and add, that having crossed Russia
and Poland at the head of 500,000 men, he entered Hungary in the
year 1241, where he staid three years, during which he put every