compare and contrast the housing condition in London and Bombay city during the 18th century
Answers
Answered by
1
Comparison between London and Bombay are
(i) Both the cities laced the problem of high density of population due to migrant population.
(ii) Both the cities faced housing crisis, growth of slums and increasing pressure on health and sanitation issues.
(iii) Both these cities were marked by contrasts of affluence and extreme poverty.
(iv) For housing the migrant population, both saw the
’ growth of tenements, which were largely owned by private landlords. In Bombay, these multi-storeyed structures were known as chawls. In both Bombay and London, houses were small, and streets aild neighbourhood were used for a variety of activities like cooking, washing and leisure by the poor.
Contrast between London and Bombay are
(i) Bombay, unlike London, from its earliest days, did not grow according to any plan.
(ii) While every Londoner in the 1840s enjoyed an average space of 155 square yards, Bombay had a mere 9.5 square yards.
(iii) Since India was a colonial country, Bombay was developed with a racial pattern. The Bombay Fort area, which formed the heart of the city, was divided into ‘native town’ and ‘white section’. But there was no such division in London city.
(iv) While town planning in London emerged from fears of social revolution, planning in Bombay was done to prevent a plague epidemic.
(i) Both the cities laced the problem of high density of population due to migrant population.
(ii) Both the cities faced housing crisis, growth of slums and increasing pressure on health and sanitation issues.
(iii) Both these cities were marked by contrasts of affluence and extreme poverty.
(iv) For housing the migrant population, both saw the
’ growth of tenements, which were largely owned by private landlords. In Bombay, these multi-storeyed structures were known as chawls. In both Bombay and London, houses were small, and streets aild neighbourhood were used for a variety of activities like cooking, washing and leisure by the poor.
Contrast between London and Bombay are
(i) Bombay, unlike London, from its earliest days, did not grow according to any plan.
(ii) While every Londoner in the 1840s enjoyed an average space of 155 square yards, Bombay had a mere 9.5 square yards.
(iii) Since India was a colonial country, Bombay was developed with a racial pattern. The Bombay Fort area, which formed the heart of the city, was divided into ‘native town’ and ‘white section’. But there was no such division in London city.
(iv) While town planning in London emerged from fears of social revolution, planning in Bombay was done to prevent a plague epidemic.
Similar questions