This chapter explores the issue of identity in Seneca Village, a nineteenth-century, middle-class, black community located in what is now Central Park in New York City. The city evicted the residents in 1857, and until recently this important village was forgotten. Using information from historical documents and material culture (including landscaping and both the form and decoration of dishes) excavated from the site in 2011, this study examines the intersection of class, race, and nationality. The evidence suggests that the identity of at least one family there was made of many strands: they may have identified themselves as members of the black middle class, as Americans, as African Americans, and perhaps even as Africans, depending on the situation and the audience. Skillful use of these strands may have been one way in which this and other village families attempted to ameliorate oppression and to make a place for themselves.
In reading J. J. Carver's excellent suggestions for how to better enable archaeology and large urban infrastructure projects to progress to mutual benefit, I found myself in enthusiastic agreement with his point that 'professional working relationships are the most important challenge for archaeology in mega projects' and that we must convince project directors, engineers, and site teams that archaeology ' can enhance the value of the project they are building' (4). This is especially crucial in cities like New York City (NYC), where government protection of cultural heritage is weaker than in London and where the city's identity is tied more to its future than its past. In futureoriented cities, it is thus necessary to take Carver's point even further and to engage people involved in all levels of urban planning and development, both at project sites and within the academic programs that train them, to help bring about a cultural shift in attitudes towards the value of archaeology. Connecting with urban studies, urban planning, or architecture students and faculty, for example, is an important contribution that academic archaeologists, who might not be familiar with large infrastructure projects, can make to help bring about this change and ensure archaeology's future in cities.With the US (and the world) becoming increasingly urbanized, urban studies programs have grown dramatically in popularity and influence, training more and more future urban leaders and workers. These programs appeal to students because they are interdisciplinary, accommodate a broad range of interests, and encourage practical applications of method and theory to solve urban problems. Despite most urban studies programs in the US incorporating history or historic preservation into their curricula, they very rarely include archaeology. This absence likely stems both from their initial growth out of architecture and planning schools and from their focus during the last few decades on contemporary urban political, social, and economic problems (Klemek 2011). As an archaeologist and a new professor in Barnard College and Columbia University's Urban Studies Program in NYC, I have been trying to make archaeology more important to my students and colleagues and a more integral part of the curriculum.Carver points out that both speaking to the concerns of non-archaeologist collaboraLinn, M 2013 Investing in Urban Studies to Ensure Urban Archaeology's Future: A Response to 'The Challenges and Opportunities for Megainfrastructure Projects and Archaeology'.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.