Urban development in England.

Urban development in England. ANNE DODD Anne (Barnes) Dodd (c. 1685–1739) was the most famous English news seller and pamphlet shop proprietor in the 18th century. In 1708, she married a Nathaniel Dodd, who had purchased a stationer's license. (ed.). Oxford before the University: the Late Saxon andNorman archaeology of the Thames crossing, the defences and the town(Thames Valley This article is about the Thames Valley in southern England. For New Zealand's Thames Valley region, see Thames Valley, New Zealand, or for the ITV region in the United Kingdom, see ITV Thames Valley. Landscapes Monograph 17). xviii+477 pages, 140 figures,53 photographs, 69 tables. 2003. Oxford: Oxford Archaeology Oxford Archaeology (formerly the Oxford Archaeological Unit) is, along with MoLAS and Wessex Archaeology, one of the big three private archaeological organisations in the United Kingdom. ;0-947816-78-X hardback 19.95 [pounds sterling]. MICHAEL J. JONES, DAVID David, in the BibleDavid,d. c.970 B.C., king of ancient Israel (c.1010–970 B.C.), successor of Saul. The Book of First Samuel introduces him as the youngest of eight sons who is anointed king by Samuel to replace Saul, who had been deemed a failure. STOCKER & ALAN VINCE VINCE Vendor Independent Network Control Entity (ed. DAVIDSTOCKER). The city by the pool: assessing the archaeology of the city ofLincoln (Lincoln Archaeological Studies No. 10). viii+424 pages, 314figures & tables, 43 colour figures. 2003. Oxford: Oxbow;1-84217-107-0 hardback 29.95 [pounds sterling]. NIGEL BAKER & RICHARD HOLT. Urban growth and the MedievalChurch: Gloucester and Worcester. xviii+413 pages, 80 figures, 7 tables.2004. Aldershot: Ashgate; 0-7546-0266-4 hardback 75 [pounds sterling]. The three books, although dealing with superficially similarthemes--the history and development of English towns--take differentroutes, from the entirely synthetic Lincoln volume, the combination ofsynthesis and site reports from Oxford to the densely detaileddescriptions of Gloucester & Worcester. The paths of assessment and analysis and the range and date of dataconsidered also vary greatly. Oxford The Oxford volume is organised in a somewhat curious fashion.Chapters 1 and 2, 'Introduction' and 'Synthesis anddiscussion' are clear and well written, providing an interestingand useful synthetic summary of the development of Oxford to around themiddle of the thirteenth century. Following this, chapters 3, 4 and 5are 'themed', examining in detail the Thames crossing, thetown's defences and the town itself. One result of this arrangementis a degree of repetition and contradiction, as the authors of the themechapters express some interpretations at odds with those presented inthe synthesis. Having decided to use the volume as a means of presentingpreviously unpublished excavations and surveys, of itself a laudable laud��a��bleadj.Healthy; favorable. aim, it seems that insufficient time has then been spent in achievingcoherence of presentation--there is too much detail and yet not enough.Particularly inaccessible are the presentations of some of theexcavations of the early and middle 1980s. Clearly, the excavators wereusing a recording system that did not stand the test of time, yet thereis no attempt to explain (for example) how the multiple sub-division ofcontext numbers was intended to work, nor to unify 1. (database, product) Unify - A relational database produced by Unify Corporation.2. (algorithm) unify - To perform unification. the presentation inline with those of more recent work. The presentation falls short of afull publication, yet is made far more difficult to read by the level ofdetail that has been retained. The two building surveys that have beenincluded are presented at an even greater level of detail than any ofthe excavations and this further serves to unbalance the piece. Some of the illustrations are let down by their presentation on thepage. There is no doubting the dedication, and indeed courage, of thosewho recorded the sections in the BT tunnel 3.5m below the streets, yetthe confused depiction of the results across two pages, in apparentlythe wrong order, scarcely does them justice. Figures 3.11a and 3.11b,although pretty, are two of the most pointless reconstruction drawings Ihave seen published. The first could be anywhere and the second onlyneeds Lara Croft CROFT, obsolete. A little close adjoining to a dwelling-house, and enclosed for pasture or arable, or any particular use. Jacob's Law Dict. to appear at the other end of the bridge to becomplete. Having been critical, these things were really only factors thatserved to make parts of the volume irritating to read and harder workthan it actually needed to be. In broader terms, the thematic approachdoes work here, and it is a tricky thing to pull off. For one who hadonly the sketchiest knowledge of Oxford's archaeology beforehand,this is an important volume, particularly as a means of comparison with'the other place', and it highlights both the similarities andstriking differences between the development of the two Universitytowns--the absence of a prehistoric pre��his��tor��ic? also pre��his��tor��i��caladj.1. Of, relating to, or belonging to the era before recorded history.2. Of or relating to a language before it is first recorded in writing. or Roman predecessor for Oxford, forexample. The volume also served to show that Oxford's academicswere rather more willing to study what was on their own doorstep thanthose of Cambridge, and the work done to bring Taunt's 1899excavations in Clarendon Quadrangle quadrangleRectangular open space completely or partially enclosed by buildings of an academic or civic character. The grounds of a quadrangle are often grassy or landscaped. into a modern publication isadmirable. Lincoln Unlike the Oxford volume, the Lincoln one is entirely synthetic anddoes not attempt to present the 'raw data' of old sites, mostof which are published elsewhere. Yet it includes sufficient detail tosupport the discussions and conclusions. It represents the integrationof two major programmes of work, being a product of the English Heritage English Heritage is a non-departmental public body of the United Kingdom government (Department for Culture, Media and Sport) with a broad remit of managing the historic environment of England. It was set up under the terms of the National Heritage Act 1983. Urban Archaeological Database (UAD) programme, aiming to provide a toolfor heritage management as well as "an account of Lincoln'spast told through interpretation of material remains" (p. 2). Thepublication is in two parts, the printed volume and an accompanyingCD-ROM with a version of 'LARA', the Lincoln ArchaeologicalResearch Assessment database and Geographical Information System Geographical Information System - Geographic Information System . Thevolume presents a sophisticated assessment within a straightforwardframework. It was well worth putting in the effort required to becomefamiliar with how the volume works and how it related with the data onthe CD-ROM (once, as a Mac user, I had found a PC to read it on). The volume presents the discussions chronologically chron��o��log��i��cal? also chron��o��log��icadj.1. Arranged in order of time of occurrence.2. Relating to or in accordance with chronology. , but thestructure allows it to step beyond the restrictions that can place on atext. The project has defined seven 'Eras'--"periods oftime of markedly different lengths during which it seemed ... that therewas a broad continuity in the city's material culture' (p.380). Within each Era are defined character areas, "geographicalcomponents based on, but not defined by, buried archaeologicalstructures, urban plan-form, building groups or past landscape andtownscape' (p. 381). Together, these produce geographical andchronological chron��o��log��i��cal? also chron��o��log��icadj.1. Arranged in order of time of occurrence.2. Relating to or in accordance with chronology. units called Research Agenda Zones or 'RAZs'.Part of the sophistication so��phis��ti��cate?v. so��phis��ti��cat��ed, so��phis��ti��cat��ing, so��phis��ti��catesv.tr.1. To cause to become less natural, especially to make less naive and more worldly.2. lies in that the RAZs are always contiguousor overlapping--there is no 'white space' on the map. For anygiven point within the area, research questions are asked at each Era.There were some minor irritations within the LARA set up (built usingthe G-SYS programme): there appears to be no facility to zoom out to theextent of the map, no 'next record' choice, and there was somedifficulty within large disparate RAZ groups in finding out what anindividual part of it may be. An important aspect of the volume was the well written and coherentsections dealing with the philosophy and approach to investigation of anurban landscape. It shows how what we can know is limited by thequestions asked and hampered by the lack of a theoretical framework,particularly in some older investigations. Particularly pertinent is thesection highlighting the limitations of a purely 'rescue'based archaeological strategy--whether it be literal rescue in the pastor today's supposedly more structured approach. In Lincoln, thishas meant that some areas of the town, although they underwentsignificant redevelopment, were not archaeologically investigated. Asthe authors say 'the "Rescue" threats ... did not ariseor were thought too remote from the "historic core" (p. 372).One example given is the lack of work on the line of a now hypothesisedcauseway to the east of the later settlement. The Lincoln Assessment(stage two of the UAD programme) also led to several significant shiftsin interpretation and direction as well as pointing up areas and aspectsnot previously recognised. Gloucester & Worcester The Gloucester & Worcester volume is quite different in bothappearance and approach to the other two. It too partially derived fromaspects of a long running research project, in this case 'EnglishMedieval Towns and the Church' between 1988 and 1994. The authorsdeclare a combined approach of "historian, archaeologist andgeographer' (p. 1) but it seems fair to comment that historian andgeographer dominate. Their objective was to look at questions concerninghow larger towns emerged as planned settlements during the pre-Conquestperiod, how powerful elements in society participated in that processand specifically how much the early growth of a town owed to its majorchurches. Whereas it could be said that the Oxford and Lincoln volumes leadwith the archaeology, this is not the case here. The main tool utilisedis a 'disaggregation process' or a 'dismantling of thetown plan' based on methodologies devised in studies of Alnwick inthe 1960s and Doncaster in the 1980s. This leads to immensely detaileddescriptions of each townscape town��scape?n.1. The appearance of a town or city; an urban scene: "The high school . . . once dominated American townscapes the way the cathedral dominated medieval European cities"in a series of 'plan-regions'comprising 'plan-units' and sub-units. The authors describethis process as 'a necessary first step towards an understanding ofthe sequence of and processes behind the growth of a medieval town, andthe agencies responsible for it; it is a means to a historical end, notan end in itself' (p. 41). The result is long detailed descriptive sections (106 pages),complex enough on their own but let down by both a lack of illustrationand clarity in some of the illustrations that are given--for example thekey to Figure 3.2 occurs in Figure 3.3, from which I learned that'm' was a mill and not a market place. The titling hierarchywas also confusing, with plan-regions (the largest unit) in small caseitalics, the lesser plan-units and sub-units below in block capitals andintermediate headings italicised in a smaller font than the rest of thetext but on the same line. However, the authors state that 'if the burden of puredescription seems more than occasionally heavy, it is because ... thereis a substantial body of evidence for a medieval settlement patternwhich ... has never before been described, let alone assessed' (p.42). This does appear to be borne out by the analyses of the developingtownscapes they are then able to build based on the descriptiveassessments. A particularly interesting section was the study in bothtowns of the development of parishes. One tool used was an applicationof 'nearest church-door principle' and comparison of thehypothetically resulting boundaries with the maps of historicalparishes, assessing convergences and divergences. This allowed anassessment of the role of the principle in parochial pa��ro��chi��al?adj.1. Of, relating to, supported by, or located in a parish.2. Of or relating to parochial schools.3. evolution and theproposal of a model for urban parish formation, at least in minsterdominated towns. They are also able to identify clear differencesbetween the parochial geography of Gloucester & Worcester. InGloucester, the evidence that planned parochial provision reflectedmajor secular boundaries is far dearer than in Worcester. Much of this study reflects the application of existing ideas andtechniques to previously unstudied townscapes rather than of innovation,but it is an application that has been carried out thoroughly and togreat avail. The authors do coin at least one new term, however,'post-mural redevelopment' by which they mean urbandevelopment achieved by the deliberate removal of defensive structures(p. 350) and they cite examples from both Gloucester & Worcester. Their work leads the authors to be more sceptical of artificialdivides between 'planned' and 'unplanned' urbandevelopment: 'the sharp divide between what might once have beentermed "organic" growth ... and deliberate, planned, urbanextension begins to dissolve on closer inspection. Organized or plannedurban landscapes could assume a range of forms' (p. 376). In answerto one of the main questions posed in the study--was there such a thingas ecclesiastical town planning town planning:see city planning. ?--the authors conclude that there wasnot: there was just town planning by ecclesiastics ECCLESIASTICS, canon law. Those persons who compose the hierarchical state of the church. They are regular and secular. Aso & Man. Inst. B. 2, t. 5, c. 4, Sec. 1. . Observation and synthesis Although superficially similar in subject matter, the three volumesare actually very different in both their approach towards and treatmentof the data, putting aside the fact that the Lincoln volume deals with amuch wider time-span. The Oxford volume is in many ways a traditionalarchaeological work, presenting data and conclusion (albeit the otherway round), and the themed approach does come off even with the elementof repetition that the structure of the volume creates. Theuncomfortable juxtaposition juxtaposition/jux��ta��po��si��tion/ (-pah-zish��un) apposition. jux��ta��po��si��tionn.The state of being placed or situated side by side. between data and analysis remains, but thework achieves its purpose in bringing together decades of otherwiseunpublished investigation. The strongest parts are the early chapters,which are an invaluable assessment of aspects of Oxford's earlydevelopment. The Gloucester & Worcester volume is also rather traditional,though very different to the Oxford book. Archaeology feels very much inthe back seat here, despite references to the investigations in bothtowns over the last 40 years. Given the espoused agenda, however,archaeology is, perhaps rightly, a complementary element in a work wherethe nuances of rental agreements, hearth tax returns, priory registriesand cartularies form such a significant aspect of the study. The Lincoln volume does not take a traditional approach, althoughsuperficially a chronological journey might be considered the mosttraditional of all. This is a truly synthetic work in whicharchaeological, historical, cartographic car��tog��ra��phy?n.The art or technique of making maps or charts.[French cartographie : carte, map (from Old French, from Latin charta, carta, paper made from papyrus , geographic and theoreticalaspects are seamlessly integrated to produce a whole that is greaterthan its parts. Although the precise methodology will not suit everytown, it demonstrates very clearly how important it is for the many UADprogrammes to move into and complete their assessment and publicationphases. All three volumes represent decades of investigation and researchand, as such, their authors are to be congratulated. All three also showthat merely descriptive archaeological publication is nor sufficient onits own: without synthesis and broader based analysis the site reportcan never be more than that, document translation can never be more thanthat, and a database is just a database. Alison Dickens, Cambridge Archaeological Unit, University ofCambridge, Cambridge, UK