Which side of town is the rich side, and which side is the poor side?
Is the most desirable real-estate reserved for retail and commerce, or for rich residences, or for industry?
In cities in the Ancient "Near East", archaeologists are used to the bigger houses (those belonging to the richer inhabitants), being on one side (if memory serves, the southwest side) of town, because the prevailing winds usually blew out of the southwest and would carry the smells of the rich neighborhoods to the poor neighborhoods rather than carrying the smells of the poor neighborhoods to the rich neighborhoods.
Does anyone have a reference for the actual direction, in case I got it wrong?
I had it in my notes from college and in my textbook as well; but I can find neither, and haven't been able to find a reference on-line.
I wonder what influnces determine the relationships between direction and location on the one hand, and social status or economics on the other, various cultures now and in history, and even pre-history if anyone knows.
Do the rich live upwind of the poor?
Or do the residences lie upwind of the industry? (Since industries are often smelly.)
Or do the rich live upstream of the poor, or do the residences lie upstream of the industry?
If the city is on a river, then water would be more desirable for drinking, cooking, and washing (dishes and selves and clothes), before someone else has washed in it or used it to wash away sewage.
Or do the rich live uphill of the poor, or do the residences lie uphill of the industry?
If the city is on a slope, liquid waste, and to a lesser extent solid waste, will flow (or just tend to drift) downhill.
Also, maybe odors are usually heavier than air and usually flow or drift downhill as well.
Or do the rich live downhill of the poor, or do the residences lie downhill of the industry?
While it's still hot, smoke tends to rise; it may be more important to avoid smoke when it's hot than after it has cooled off some and started to settle downhill in the valleys.
Or do the rich live nearer the water and the poor further away?
If there mostly isn't running fresh water supplied to the houses, it may be a big slog a few times every day to haul water from its source back to the house.
Maybe the rich get to have less of a slog.
Or maybe the middle class, who can pay more for houses but can't hire or buy servants, get the real-estate near the water; the really really wealthy, who can buy or hire servants to do all the hard work, live upslope of everyone else; and the poor are in between.
Or, possibly, money-making enterprises, especially commercial ones but maybe also industrial ones, get the prime real-estate near the water.
What about which floors in buildings are more desirable?
If there aren't any or many elevators or they aren't cheap or they're avoided to conserve energy, likely most buildings won't be more than three storeys tall, and the most desirable floor will be the ground floor.
That seems to be so in modern London, at least the parts built before elevators were common and cheap. Am I right or wrong? And can anyone provide a reference, and/or a URL?
Do such cultures tend to have mostly retail businesses like shops and taverns and restaurants on the ground floor; a mix of businesses and better residences on the next floor up; and the low-rent apartments, as well as studios and other places for people who need good light all day long, on the top floor?
What about basements?
Which cultures tend to have half-sunk "basements" or "ground floors" (whichever term is appropriate), so there would be "dives" a half-storey downstairs and the walk-up to the floor above would be only half as high?
In such cultures does that contribute to having retail businesses on the half-sunk ground floor and also on the next floor up, and residences on the floor above the ground-floor and the top floor?
What about mezzanines?
In which cultures are "first storeys" typically twice or one-and-a-half times as tall as most other storeys? And why?
Among those cultures, in which are there sometimes mezzanines halfway up the first storey?
What about signage?
If your business is in the basement; or in the half-sunk basement; or on the ground-floor; or on the half-raised floor; or on the second floor; or on the top floor; that all affects how you need to advertise your location.
You can just hang out a shingle if you're half-sunk or on the ground floor.
It might be a bit less effective to do just that if you're on the second floor.
If you're on the top floor, you need a bigger sign, a banner or something spanning as much as the width of the building and a quarter to all of the height of the storey, to be sure your sign was visible from the street.
If you're in the basement and it's all-the-way underground you also have a similar visibility problem; but you don't have the same solutions available.
How are such problems handled in various real-world cultures at various places in the world and various times in history?
Aren't there some cultures that never have such problems? Which ones do and which ones don't?
Were/are there any societies besides the Pacific Northwest where large sedentary populations were supported by Hunter-gathering?
I believe some societies of Mesolithic Europe were sedentary, mainly on the coast.
I once read that the Neolithic revolution in the British islands and Northwestern Europe was delayed by about a century because the hunter-gatherer industry was productive enough that the agricultural industry couldn't compete against it successfully -- for a while.
Sorry I have no reference. It was in a magazine, maybe the National Geographic, maybe Scientific American, maybe Discovery or something else.