Paper short abstract:

Does archaeology lack the theorised methodology to capitalise on its unique position in the study of the urban process or is it hamstrung by its acceptance of the rural/urban dichotomy? It is argued that archaeology would in fact benefit from a re-evaluation of its approach to settlement characterisation.

Paper long abstract:

The development of urban settlements in a society is synonymous with a concept of progress toward civilisation. Unsurprisingly this position leaves the concept of the urban place as open to exploitation in the development of archaeological narratives, particularly when it can construed to be of nationalistic relevance.

Through an exploration of archaeological interpretations of urban development in early medieval England it will be demonstrated that this notion of the urban place, of its efficacy in our understanding of that society, has been utilised in the post-war development of a revised national narrative. Despite subsequent critique following a growth in available data, it has not been possible to move beyond the basic concept of whether a specific site was or was not urban in character. In this model it is questionable to what extent the nuances and complexities of wider, inter-settlement structures can be explored. It will be argued that archaeologists need to explore alternative forms of settlement characterisation, that they need not accept the rural/urban dichotomy as a natural to format of settlement opposition.