Close

The Oxford Companion To Archaeology (2 ed.)

Edited by Neil Asher Silberman

Publisher:

Oxford University Press

Print Publication Date:

2012

Print ISBN-13:

9780199735785

Author(s):
Steven R. Pendery

URBAN ARCHAEOLOGY
Urban archaeology involves performing archaeology in urban environments and the application of
archaeological methods to the study of cities and the process of urbanization. Archaeologists are
interested in urban sites in part because of the close link between cities and civilization. Since they first
emerged in Mesopotamia about 5,000 years ago, cities share the characteristics of relatively high
populations (above 5,000), centralized political and administrative institutions, complex economies with
specialization of labor, and social stratification. Archaeologists can recover information about these and
other aspects of urbanization using specialized fieldwork methods developed for today’s urban
environment. Urban archaeology attracts widespread public interest, but sites are still being lost at a rapid
rate.

History.
Urban archaeology shares the roots of archaeology as a discipline. During the Renaissance, interest in
human antiquity motivated early excavations in Rome and other Italian cities. Portions of Herculaneum
and Pompeii were explored more systematically during the eighteenth century. In 1870, Heinrich
Schliemann pioneered basic archaeological methods at Hissarlik, the site of Homeric Troy, in western
Turkey. The existence of the Harappan civilization was revealed through excavations at Mohenjo-Daro
and Harappa in India by Sir John Marshall in the 1920s. V. Gordon Childe developed his concept of the
“urban revolution” as the second greatest human development after agriculture, based on information
from excavations at town sites throughout the Middle East. Excavations at Anyang in the 1920s revealed
the Bronze Age Shang Dynasty Culture of China. Teotihuacán, the Valley of Mexico site of the largest
prehistoric city in the New World (studied by Rene Millon and other archaeologists), represents both a city
and a civilization.

Since World War II, the redevelopment of European cities has provided a new impetus for urban
archaeology. Britain’s war-damaged cities provided opportunities for archaeological study of sites dating
back to Roman times that otherwise would be inaccessible. In redeveloped districts of London,
Winchester, York, and Exeter, and many other British cities, archaeologists have studied the evolution of
urban settlement patterns, architecture, manufacturing, trade, and consumer behavior. The construction
of urban transit corridors and underground parking facilities provides opportunities to study deeply buried
sites. In Paris, construction of subterranean parking on the Isle de la Cité during the 1970s and 1980s
revealed Gallo-Roman, medieval, and post-medieval sites. When the foundations of the castle of Charles
V were discovered during construction at the Louvre Museum, planners successfully incorporated them
into the design for the new subterranean museum galleries. Museum involvement in urban archaeology
can facilitate public dissemination of results through exhibits, site tours, and publications.

American urban archaeology is a more recent development. The National Historic Preservation Act of
1966 provides for the protection and study of significant archaeological sites threatened by federal
undertakings. Many states and some cities have enacted their own legislation protecting significant
archaeological sites. Consequently, archaeologists have had opportunities and resources to investigate
urban sites ignored until recently. Construction of transportation corridors through historic sections of
Philadelphia, Boston, Atlanta, Knoxville, and Seattle helped to pioneer the archaeological study of those
cities. Several American cities, including Alexandria, Virginia; Annapolis, Maryland; and Boston,
Massachusetts, have active municipal urban archaeology programs.

The past three decades have witnessed the spread of urban archaeology across the Americas, Europe,
and parts of sub-Saharan Africa. In Mexico City, archaeologists have investigated both pre-colonial
Tenochtitlan and the impact of Spanish colonization. The colonial and post-colonial periods of cities as
diverse as Québec and Buenos Aires have been elucidated through archaeology. Despite the ubiquity of
urban archaeology in the Western Hemisphere, there are few regional or international comparative
studies, and no professional organization is dedicated to this topic. It remains to be seen whether the
urban archaeology of the recent past is a subject that will be embraced in North Africa, the Middle East,
and Asia.

Practicing Urban Archaeology.

Archaeologists have had to develop special methods to work in the urban environment. Sampling
strategies, fieldwork, expenses, and public outreach are noticeably different than for rural sites. Urban
archaeologists must be opportunistic in their approach to sampling modern cities. Sites usually become
available for excavation due to the exigencies of urban planning, not because of their archaeological
significance. For this reason, it is especially important that urban archaeologists establish research
priorities for sites to be excavated. For example, there has been an ongoing debate about the continuity
of the commercial function of towns in post-Roman Britain. The Pirenne thesis, named after historian
Henri Pirenne (1862–1935), postulates that urban life in northern Europe all but ended with the expansion
of Islam in the eighth century AD. Redevelopment within the city of London during the 1970s and 1980s
enabled archaeologists from the Museum of London to examine the physical evidence for waterfront
development and trade for this period in order to address this thesis. City archaeologists usually identify
key research questions and the sites where they can best be addressed, negotiate with project sponsors
and research teams, and ensure that the research design is adequately addressed.

Sampling individual urban sites can be difficult from research and curatorial perspectives as they often
contain large amounts of landfill imported from other areas. During the nineteenth century, the city of
Boston more than doubled its area in this fashion. What constitutes an adequate sample of this type of fill
for archaeological purposes? Should tens or hundreds of thousands of artifacts from urban landfill be
processed and curated indefinitely, often at public expense? These are not traditional archaeological
problems, and the answers must be decided on a case-by-case basis.
Historical documentation is essential for the sampling and interpretation of urban sites. Most, if not all,
modern cities contain public records such as land deeds, probates, tax records, and maps. Private and
commercial records may include account books and diaries, as well as drawings, paintings, and
photographs of townscapes. This documentation must be carefully evaluated in formulating
archaeological research designs. It is usually possible to identify the past owners and users of urban land
parcels. This information may be helpful in targeting specific types of historic sites for archaeological
investigation. In Alexandria, Virginia, tax and census records were used by urban archaeologist Pamela
Cressey to develop an archaeological sampling strategy. In Charlestown, Massachusetts, archaeologists
used insurance atlas maps to predict the locations of well-preserved sites in urban renewal areas.
Archaeologist William Rathje examines demographic and income data about households whose
contemporary garbage he samples. This has led to discoveries about consumer behavior that differ from
those based on interviews and questionnaires.

Cleared urban parcels may be surveyed by a combination of geophysical survey and documentary
research. The methods of excavating urban sites are varied and often quite costly. Heavy equipment,
including backhoes and front-end loaders, is routinely used for removing deposits lacking archaeological
significance. “Backdirt” usually must be trucked away due to a lack of space on the site. Security
measures require fencing and covering urban sites. Pumps are often needed to evacuate ground- and
rainwater from excavation units. However, recording methods that are employed on urban sites are as
rigorous as those used on rural sites. The Harris Matrix, developed by archaeologist Edward Harris for
recording and analyzing complex stratigraphy, is often employed. Exposed urban structures and deposits
may be laser-scanned, a documentation method employed in recent years at the Templo Major pyramid
uncovered in Mexico City’s Zocalo, and at the Baker Robinson Whale Oil Factory site in New Bedford,
Massachusetts.

Urban sites also provide good opportunities to educate and to involve the public in archaeology because
of their proximity to large populations. Urban excavations typically receive considerable media coverage.
Often, city dwellers may directly observe or participate in excavation and laboratory analysis. The Toronto
Board of Education in Canada has incorporated archaeology into the public school curriculum and
conducts excavations for this purpose. Excavated sites that are stabilized and displayed to the public can
have didactic value.

Current Status.
Urbanization is increasing worldwide and one consequence is the rapid loss of archaeological data. The
enactment of legislation protecting urban archaeological resources has proven to be an effective way to
slow this attrition of information. Still, there is no consensus among archaeologists about the theoretical
orientation and priorities of urban archaeology. Urban archaeology is usually undertaken from a reactive
rather than an active posture. Public dissemination of information from urban excavations is far from
adequate.

In both archaeology and anthropology, the urban environment represents a relatively new frontier.
Despite the difficulties they face, urban archaeologists contribute to our understanding of the origins of
urbanization and of modern urban problems in the areas of sanitation, transportation, housing, and social
and material hierarchies. Urban archaeology also captures the imagination of the public. As its methods
become standardized and a broader comparative perspective is adopted, urban archaeology should
make greater contributions to archaeological theory.

[See also CHILDE, V. GORDON; HARAPPA; MESOPOTAMIA: THE RISE OF URBAN CULTURE; MOHENJO DARO;
Pompeii and Herculaneum; SCHLIEMANN, HEINRICH; TENOCHTITLÁN; TEOTIHUACÁN; TROY; YORK.]

Bibliography
Bradley, James W. “Before Albany.” New York State Museum Bulletin 509, 2007. An elegant case study
in urban archaeology that elucidates early colonial relations with Native Americans.

Council of Europe. Report on the Situation of Urban Archaeology in Europe, 1999.

Green, Adrian, and Roger Leech, eds. Cities in the World, 1500–2000. The Society for Post-Medieval
Archaeology Monograph 3, 2006. The case studies are skewed toward British and American examples,
but they demonstrate a range of applications of archaeology in the study of urban architecture and
planning.

Moss, William, ed. “The Recent Archaeology of the Early Modern Period in Québec City.” Post-Medieval
Archaeology 43, no. 1 (2009): 1–257. This issue chronicles the development of the city of Quebec from
an archaeological perspective, from the initial settlements of Cartier and Champlain down to the industrial
period. It exemplifies the benefits of institutional cooperation in conducting urban archaeology.

Schavelzon, Daniel. Historical Archaeology of Buenos Aires, 2000. Schavelzon is an important figure in
Latin American urban archaeology, and this book is based on decades of sustained research.

Young, Amy, Shannon Lee Dawdy, Martha Zierdan, and Bonnie Gums, eds. Archaeology of Southern
Urban Landscapes, 2000. There are relatively few comparative treatments of urban archaeology at
multiple cities within a single region. This book builds on a long tradition of urban archaeology conducted
in the American Southeast.

Steven R. Pendery