Conclusions: Ontological Relations and the Spatial Politics of Capital Cities

Abstract

The frontispiece to this this volume, an example of an urban beautification mural project with a view of the alborz Mountains in southern tehran, visualizes the focus of this book on political landscapes of capital cit- ies; the essays presented here assess the actual, imagined (illustrated by the mural), and constructed (present in the infrastructure) qualities of space across cultures to explore the ways governments create relational social networks that effectively convey, maintain, and negoti- ate their political ideals and sovereign authority.1 We present case studies that focus on capital cities because they represent the principal jurisdictional location where regimes assert their sovereignty.2 Our results promote a pluralist vision of the role of architecture, urban planning and spatial gesticulation (actual and symbolic) play in forming social meaning within com- plex and at times diversified constellations of political authority. Using adam t. Smith’s work The Political Landscape as an intellectual springboard, our essays also show that political space can accommodate a plethora of agendas that are neither static in relation to time nor unique to any given place or people.