ABSTRACT
“There’s no doubt that there are different academic traditions in various countries,” wrote historian Donatella Calabi, “in which, for example, the relationships between planning history, urban history and architectural history are different” (2015). In this spirit, one of the godfathers of planning history, Anthony Sutcliffe, identified “a specifically Latin culture of urbanisme, which is used to contextualize both planning and architecture” (2002). The lack of translations makes it difficult for the English-speaking world to appreciate the specificities of urbanismo and urbanistica, and prevents the inclusion of this body of work in the wider debate about planning history.
