Didn't actually finish the book. Should have liked it, given that I am already a convinced urbanite and that I like history. However, the book was more of a sociiolgy book than history. The first chapter, the book about Ur the first city, was the most interesting. The book goes downhill from there. The chapters are supposed to be chronological, focusing on different cities throughout time. But the chapters also have themes, themes that don't really make a lot of sense. For the chapter on Rome, the author talks a lot about bathing. Sure, the Romans were known to like their baths. But is that really the most important or interesting thing to focus on when discussing Rome? For Paris, the author goes on and on about "flaneurs" and describes the impact of Haussmann's reconstruction of Paris by painful descriptions of paintings. Nothing about the military implications/public order implications of the wider boulevards?

There must be better books out there