"AN EQUIL SPAISE ON EACH SID OF YOUR HOUSE": A BRIEF

~~
68
"AN EQUIL SPAISE ON EACH SID OF YOUR HOUSE":
A BRIEF SURVEY OF THE POTENTIAL FOR ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESEARCH
IN AN URBAN SETTING
Timothy B. Riordan
Resource Analysts, Inc.
Bloom ington, Indiana
ABSTRACT
The continued growth and development of urban land use is an
established fact in American society. Archaeologists are faced
not only with the problem of urban sprawl threatening important sites but also the problem of evaluating urban areas for
their potential scientific or cultural significance. For many
years, cultural resource managers, including many archaeologists, assumed that the dynamic growth of urban areas had
destroyed all significant resources in such areas. This paper
reviews recent prehistoric and historic archaeological work
that refutes this assumption. It demonstrates that significant
resources do exist in urban settings and that great benefit can
be derived from their study.
The continued growth and development of the urban landscape is an established fact in American society. Archaeologists have long recognized that this
development threatens many important sites. In addition, they are being asked
more and more frequently to assess the potential significance of areas already
engulfed by urban sprawl. In the past, most cultural resource managers, including many archaeologists, have assumed that the dynamic cycles of building and
rebuilding in American cities have entirely destroyed any significant cultural
resources that may have been there. Recent excavations in metropolitan areas
across the country have demonstrated that this assumption is simply not true.
As the results of these projects are published, it becomes increasingly clear that
significant prehistoric and historic archaeological sites do exist in our metropolitan areas. This paper briefly reviews some of this work and discusses the implicat ions for future management of these resources.
On a general level, cultural resource managers are faced with three basic
questions when considering urban areas. The first of these is simply whether or
not anything might be preserved despite the massive disturbances that appear to
occur in the city land use. It cannot be stated too strongly that while major
impacts have occurred, significant remains still exist. Boston provides a good
example of this point. The Boston area is one of the oldest settled and most intensely occupied regions in the country. It is also home to one of the most famOllS urban archaeological sites, the Boylston Street Fishseries (Johnson et al. 1942;
Johnson, ed. 1949). This well-preserved site, dating to 2,500 B.C., was discovered
in the center of downtown Boston. This is not an isolated occurrence. A recent
survey of the Boston basin revealed 135 prehistoric sites in back yards, vaca~t
lots, and parks (Dincauze 1974). On November 18, 1981, the Boston ~lobe, In a
front page story, reported on excavations conducted at Dock Square In downtown
~~--~-.
~
--
----
--~--~---
----
- - -- -- - - - -
_.- -
----_.
-.~
69
Boston by the Massachusetts Historical Commission. Beneath 12 feet (ca. 3.7
meters) of pavement and fill, the excavators located the remains of a 17th
century dock and associated artifacts and structures.
Boston is not the only city which has produced sites of such significance.
Excavations at Franklin's Court in Philadelphia (Legget 1973) revealed the foundation and associated remains of Benjamin Franklin's house under the foundations
of two houses dating to the 19th and 20th centuries, respectively. This site now
forms an integral part of Independence National park and, incidentally, provided
the quote used in the title of this paper. We could continue to list examples
but it is really not necessary. It is sufficient to simply say that cities such as
Boston, New York, Philadelphia, Washington, Detroit, New Orleans, Charleston
(S.c.), Savannah (Ga.), Seattle, Sacramento, Boise, and Baltimore have all produced similar results. This conclusively proves that urban areas, in spite of
whatever apparent disturbances may have taken place, cannot simply be written
off as destroyed.
Since these resources do exist, the next question one must face is whether
they are significant in an historical or scientific sense. The guidelines for determining significance are well known and need not be repeated here. Some
sites, like Benjamin Franklin's house, are obviously significant under several
aspects of these criteria. Other sites are more problematic. What is the significance of an 1880s row of houses or a 1900s sawmill? These sites must be
judged on their research potential. As simple as this statement seems, it is the
most difficult step in the entire process. There are no established research designs for studying a modern industrial city. Without a unified research design,
each site must be approached on a case by case basis. Rather than reviewing a
house as a sample of the larger universe of a city, we must demonstrate the
significance of the individual house. It is very difficult to convince even an informed person of the significance of an 1880s house foundation when similar
houses still exist by the thousands. The criteria of potential research data forces
us to look beyond individual sites and recognize patterns in the architectural and
ma ter ial culture.
The easiest way to illustrate this point is to review work that has lead in
this direction. Excavations in downtown Boise, Idaho (Jones 1980; 1983), revealed the presence of several domestic structure foundations sealed under three
layers of blacktop. Historical documentation demonstrated that these houses
were part of Boise's Chinatown during the 19th century and that there was a distinct economic difference between various houses. Analysis of the ceramic breakage pattern demonstrated some interesting points. The ceramics from the poor
Chinese households were American made and consisted mostly of bowls. The
wealthier Chinese were using imported Chinese plates and platters more frequently.
The latter pattern is similar to Euroamerican sites in the Pacific Northwest. The
implication. was that the poorer Chinese were using American ceramics in Chinese
ways while the wealthier Chinese used imported ceramics in Euroamerican ways.
This is in agreement with recent studies of social class and ethnicity (Rose 1976)
and offers exciting possibilities for the study of acculturation. Other researchers
in both New Orleans and Charleston, South Carolina, have attempted to study
changing adaptations to urban development through the method of pattern recognition discussed by Stanley South (1977). Their attempts to point out differences
between urban domestic sites and rural domestic sites has led to the postulation
of an urban artifact pattern.
---
- - - - - - - - - - -- --
-------
70
This should not be taken as an abandonment of site specific data. Urban
sites, particularly early industrial sites, can.contribute a great deal to our understanding of the temporal and spatial distributions of artifacts and the meaning
of these distributions. The Bonnin and Morris Porcelain Factory in Philadelphia
(Cotter 1975) provided a good sample of the shapes and kinds of wares produced
at the pottery. The description of these fragments will allow the assignment
of fragments at other sites to this factory. This data can be used to trace
trade networks, date sites, and provide economic status information on the individuals who used them. A second aspect of important site specific data is
the potential for tightly dated artifact samples with good associations. A number of artifact-laden privies from the mid-19th century were uncovered during
excavations prior to the construction of the Renaissance Center in Detroit (Resource Analysts, Inc. 1981). These artifact clusters provided an incredibly detailed and chronologically discrete picture of life in Detroit around 1860. A
recently completed excavation in Baltimore revealed 20 privies and a well dating
1795-1850. The most important discovery of this project was a stone-lined cellar, constructed in 1754 and filled with late 18th century trash (Timothy Jones,
personal communication). These projects have directly contributed to our understanding of the urban environment and our technical ability to describe and
evaluate historical sites.
The final question facing cultural resource managers is how does one approach
a research universe as large as a modern city? The task seems staggering. For
archaeologists accustomed to dealing with small, isolated sites, the complexity of
a modern city is overwhelming. The ideal procedure would be to formulate a research design to .study a particular city and specifically select sites for testing
and data recovery. Such a task would involve many years and a great expenditure
of seldom available funds. None of the studies herein discussed were organized
in this manner. All of the work currently being done in urban settings is salvage
archaeology done before the construction of new facilities. This approach is not
necessarily harmful to the resources. Nevertheless, we must be aware that these
resources do exist and not abandon areas to the bulldozer simply because they
have been built over.
'
In having to deal with this situation and discussing it with others in a similar
predicament, a structured approach to the problem has been formulated. The
first step to any project is a detailed land use history. This literature review
will answer basic questions about what happened on a particular tract of land,
who lived there, what function the buildings served, and what destructive activities may have occurred. Particularly useful for these purposes are fire insurance maps, city directories, and tax records. All of these records are commonly
available for most cities. More importantly, the detailed land use history will
identify areas (e.g., alleys, back yards, parks, and vacant lots) that have been
relatively undisturbed by recent building activity. These are the areas of highest
sensitivity. The second step is to test these areas to ascertain if significant features remain undisturbed. At this stage of the investigation, it is most advantageous to use power equipment. Often significant features may be buried under
10 feet (ca. 3.05 meters) or more of fill rending hand excavation out of the
question. If significant de posts are found during testing, these can be dated and
interpreted by reference to the land use history.
in
The final step is to select a sample for data recovery. It is at this stage
the planning process that a knowledge of the city's development and the .
'.
71
resources associated with a particular tract becomes vital. It is not practical
to collect every artifact recovered from these excavations. Given that funds
for data recovery and analysis are often limited, it is better to tightly sample
the individual resources on a land tract than to get a small sample from every
component. Only by making this difficult choice wil1 we be able to comprehend
the archaeological record of urban landscapes. Without such a choice, our sampling of the city will remain superficial and the archaeological contribution to our
understanding of the urban experience will be unfulfilled.
In sum, the urban setting provides an exciting if sometimes frustrating field
of study for the historical archaeologist. It must be made clear that urban sites
cannot be simply written off as totally disturbed without careful historical and
archaeological research. There is far too much potential in these sites for understanding American society to simply allow them to be ignored.