Urban archaeological restoration report

Introduction

Urban archaeology is the archaeological practice in an active urban environment, one of its peculiarities is the management of archaeological complexity in overlapping cities.

Urban Archeology encompasses four essential aspects: research, restoration, integration and dissemination. To achieve this, the registration system has to be unified, both in excavation and for the study of materials.[1].

History of the discipline

The development of excavations within active cities, as well as an increasing sensitivity to the destruction of a subsoil that must be the object of studies, forces archaeologists to justify their costly and annoying activities in the eyes of those who do not share their enthusiasm or participate in the importance of the subject.[2].

In Tours in 1980, more than one hundred researchers specialized in urban archeology met around four reflection groups: urban archeology as a scientific discipline, French experiences in urban archaeology, the means of analysis and research programming to evaluate the urban archaeological heritage and lastly the intervention procedures. The organizers of the meeting were Henri Galinie") and Bernard Randoin"), founding members of the active Laboratoire d’Archeologie Urbaine de Tours and authors in 1979 of the first complete study on the historical topography of this French city understood as a succession of plants by historical phases bringing together all the available archaeological information.

Although it was a national French meeting, various British, Dutch and German colleagues were invited. Throughout the seventies, archaeological excavations in various English cities had been the training ground for many young French archaeologists specialized in medieval and modern times. The communications presented the works in cities such as the City of London, Oxford, Amsterdam, Sofia, Tours, Bordeaux, Lyon, Orleans, Douai or Lübeck. Syntheses were also presented on archeology in small cities, urban archaeological heritage in Great Britain, or the “erosion of history” in Dutch cities.

Martin Biddle, born in 1937, was then an expert British archaeologist specializing in urban archeology of the medieval, modern and contemporary eras. His excavations in the city of Winchester for almost 20 years, like those of Philip Barker") in Wroxeter, had marked a path to follow as a training quarry for a good number of archaeologists who participated in them on a voluntary basis.[2].

Urban archaeological restoration report

Introduction

Urban archaeology is the archaeological practice in an active urban environment, one of its peculiarities is the management of archaeological complexity in overlapping cities.

History of the discipline

Urban archeology in Spain

Urban archeology is a relatively recent discipline that has experienced intense development in the last twenty-five years as a consequence of the greater social demand for knowledge and preservation of local cultural heritage and the redevelopment of historic centers.[1].

These infrastructure works and new construction on the old city on numerous occasions contemplate the total disappearance of the archaeological records of the preceding cities and an irreparable loss of historical information. This has brought about numerous tensions between real estate interests, public administrations, archaeological research and citizen demand, a balance that is difficult to resolve in an acceptable manner.

In 1985, the Spanish Historical Heritage Law was approved, which opened new perspectives for Spanish Archeology in general, and urban archeology in particular. The foundations are laid to meet the new objectives that must result in conceiving the city as a unique site and, therefore, there must be a Comprehensive Urban Archeology Project.

The Comprehensive Project encompasses four essential aspects: research, restoration, integration and dissemination. To achieve this, it is a sine qua non that the registration system is unified, both in excavation and for the study of materials.

This can be achieved not only by establishing a unified criterion, but

also with the sole coordination of work in the city, although it is not essential for this to be a one-person position, since it can be assumed by a team.

Likewise, it is advisable that there be close collaboration between Archeology and Urban Planning, or in other words, between the coordinator of the city's Archaeological Intervention area and the Urban Planning Management of the City Councils. Communication and active participation between the University and those responsible, whether individuals or companies, who can undertake these works, is highly recommended.

The last step of all these efforts is dissemination, structured into three levels: scientific, informative-pedagogical and heritage, the culmination of which must be translated into cultural tourism programs.

In the case of Mérida "Mérida (Spain)"), Urban Archeology must be governed by strictly unified criteria, which results in the advancement of knowledge of the evolution and uniqueness of superimposed cities.

In the case of Mérida "Mérida (Spain)"), methodologically a unified excavation and documentation system is established. For the excavation process, the Harris registration method is followed, while in the documentation section various aspects are collected: the archaeological report, the photographic and planimetric documentation, the file of the excavated archaeological area in which the plot sheet, the block and the site in which the intervention is carried out, the use of the structures that appeared, their chronology, and their possible relationship with others already contrasted, and geographically close.

All this data is subsequently included in archaeological-chronological plans made at a scale of 1/1000 and 1/5000,[3] so that the information can always be found and consulted quickly and, where appropriate, completed if new interventions are undertaken.

Methodologically, the two excavation systems coexist: the Wheeler-Lamboglia and the Harris method, the latter gaining more and more ground over the former.

With urban archeology, the free exercise of the archaeological profession was also born in Spain. Like any emerging activity, the archaeologist has sought his place in an environment subject to tensions characterized by job insecurity and his position between the public dimension of the archaeological heritage and the private interest of the real estate developer, all this together with little regulation of the intervention and deontological standards that guarantee quality work activity.[1].

The research deficit of the so-called management archeology, which includes urban excavations, focused on the solution of urban planning files, even when all professionals are aware that archeology, if it is not research and subsequent dissemination of the results, becomes an activity without justification.

An explicit commitment of the competent public administrations as guarantors before citizens of the destiny of cultural heritage. Urban archeology in Spanish cities demands committed protection and prevention urban planning that reduces the number of archaeological excavations and allows the resources of real estate developers to be concentrated on those key interventions for the historical interpretation of the city.

At the same time, greater public investment is required in everything related to subsequent research and dissemination of the results, which gives true meaning to archaeological work.[4].

But the great novelty of urban work was a new form of action that abandoned the University and Museums that since the century had capitalized on archaeological research by organizing themselves into Rescue Units and Trusts: autonomous research teams gathered wherever their presence was necessary, financed and controlled by economic agreements and agreements signed between local, regional, state, religious and private authorities.[2].

Urban archeology in Latin America

Historical archeology had an irregular development in different areas within Latin America.

Lourdes Domínguez and Pedro Paulo Funari oppose Hispanic cities to Portuguese cities as two different types of approaches to urban life. Hispanic cities were planned, in Renaissance style, as rectangular grids, while Portuguese cities continued medieval-type curves.[5].

The popularity of urban archeology is lower among archaeologists from countries that have strong precolonial roots and a prestigious body of archaeological remains from Indian civilizations, such as Mexico, Peru, and Ecuador. The same applies to countries whose Indigenous communities today maintain a strong sense of identity, such as in Paraguay, where 90% of the population speaks Guaraní.

As historical archeology has traditionally focused on European remains, it is not surprising that it has developed first and foremost in those countries whose national identities are mostly strongly linked to Europe, notably Argentina, Uruguay, and Brazil.

As in the United States, historical archeology has been the “archaeology of ourselves,” the cultural history of the descendants of Europeans.

While in the United States there is an emphasis on perceived discontinuities between the premodern and modern periods, in the countries of the southern cone there are several reasons why a hiatus as such does not prevail, first and foremost, one must admit, due to a subjective perception of the past that emphasizes continuity over change.

Various urban sites have been excavated, and although in most cases it is not possible to attempt to reconstruct the urban settlement as a whole and its changes over time, the excavations have produced archaeological evidence that can provide a better understanding of city life in Latin America.

Thanks to non-destructive techniques, such as field-surface surveys and the study of ancient maps and other iconographic materials, it has been possible to propose ways of understanding urban material culture in a variety of different historical and geographical contexts.

Hispanic America was founded through cities, so within the first hundred years of colonization, there were already 225 Hispanic cities, reaching the impressive number of 330 by 1600. These cities obeyed the rules established by Spanish laws in relation to their features, most of which established a chess frame around the central plaza where the most important buildings of justice, administration and religion were located. The distribution of the population in the city was also regulated, so that neighbors, or citizens, and inhabitants, settled in different areas.[5].

The Portuguese Crown maintained the medieval urban settlement pattern, in clear contrast to the introduction of modern planning by the Spanish state.

In the case of Havana, the archaeological excavations, in their execution, can be divided into four main contexts, the civil, public buildings, the domestic or where families live, the religious in which churches and convents may be, and military constructions, especially castles, bastions and batteries.[5].

In some cases, historical and urban archeology is opposed to the rest of archaeology, considered the work of architects and historians, thus denying one of the fields of archaeological research in the modern world.[6].

Urban archeology in Spain

This can be achieved not only by establishing a unified criterion, but

also with the sole coordination of work in the city, although it is not essential for this to be a one-person position, since it can be assumed by a team.

Methodologically, the two excavation systems coexist: the Wheeler-Lamboglia and the Harris method, the latter gaining more and more ground over the former.

At the same time, greater public investment is required in everything related to subsequent research and dissemination of the results, which gives true meaning to archaeological work.[4].

Urban archeology in Latin America

Historical archeology had an irregular development in different areas within Latin America.

As in the United States, historical archeology has been the “archaeology of ourselves,” the cultural history of the descendants of Europeans.

The Portuguese Crown maintained the medieval urban settlement pattern, in clear contrast to the introduction of modern planning by the Spanish state.

Navegación

Urban archaeological restoration report

Introduction

History of the discipline

Urban archaeological restoration report

Introduction

History of the discipline

Urban archeology in Spain

Urban archeology in Latin America

References

Urban archeology in Spain

Urban archeology in Latin America

References

Navegación

Urban archaeological restoration report

Introduction

History of the discipline

Urban archaeological restoration report

Introduction

History of the discipline

Urban archeology in Spain

Urban archeology in Latin America

Related posts

References

Urban archeology in Spain

Urban archeology in Latin America

Related posts

References