MIDCONTINENTAL JOURNAL OF ARCHAEOLOGY 2024, VOL. 49, NO. 2, xxx–xxx Excavating Chicago from the Armours to Mies: Notes from the Field Rebecca S. Graffa and Shannon Martinob a Department of Sociology and Anthropology, Lake Forest College, 555 N. Sheridan Rd., Lake Forest, IL 60045 b Humanities Department, Morton College, 3801 S. Central Ave., Cicero, IL 60804 ABSTRACT KEYWORDS Chicago’s preoccupation with its architectural heritage has created an architourism industry around extant works by famous architects like Daniel H. Burnham, Louis Sullivan, Frank Lloyd Wright, and Mies van der Rohe. The social histories of these buildings can be illuminated through archaeological research such as the 2023 summer field project at the former sites of the Armour Mission and the Armour Flats. Excavation there produced materials related to the processes of urban renewal that made manifest the Mies-designed site plan for the Illinois Institute of Technology (IIT) campus. Amid building demolition, we recovered evidence of food consumption patterns as well as several children’s toys from the turn of the twentieth century. The results presented here are preliminary—full analysis will be shared with our community partners in the Black Metropolis National Heritage Area to see what responses, correctives, or new questions for future research emerge. Chicago; historical archaeology; urban renewal; Illinois Institute of Technology; Armour; Mies van der Rohe Introduction Chicago’s civic identity is intimately tied to its nineteenth- and twentieth-century architectural heritage to a degree that is unique among American cities. This connection is evidenced by the preponderance of headquarters for major national and international architecture and architectural history societies, as well as by the size of its architecturally centered tourist economy. Daniel Burnham’s Beaux-Arts architectural program of the 1893 World’s Columbian Exposition, the Chicago School of architecture and its steel-framed skyscrapers, Louis Sullivan’s “form follows function” aesthetics, Frank Lloyd Wright’s prairie homes, Ludwig Mies van der Rohe’s modernist boxes—all are heralded, evoked, and monetized via “architourism” as a central part of what Chicago is supposed to offer to the world. One historian flippantly observed that “in Chicago, even the cab drivers seem to know the major architects and their buildings” (Bruegmann 2008:76). And the extant CONTACT Rebecca S. Graff graff@lakeforest.edu © 2024 Midwest Archaeological Conference MCJA 49_2 Graff_Martino.indd 1 4/3/24 8:49 AM 2 MIDCONTINENTAL JOURNAL OF ARCHAEOLOGY buildings deemed of architectural value are numerous. The National Register of Historic Places lists 396 properties within Chicago, of which 41 are also National Historic Landmarks representing “an outstanding aspect of American history and culture” (National Register Database 2022; National Park Service 2022). Local recognitions with an emphasis on standing structures also abound in listings like that of the City of Chicago’s Commission on Chicago Landmarks, which currently contains 384 individual landmarks and 62 landmark districts (City of Chicago 2023). Given the city’s officially endorsed preoccupation with its architectural heritage, it should be of little surprise that in Chicago historical archaeological research is routinely considered a “handmaiden” to both architectural preservation and precontact-period archaeological research (Noel Hume 1964:214; see Graff 2024). This is in stark contrast to American cities on the east, the west, and the Gulf coasts—such as Boston; Alexandria, Virginia; and New Orleans—that have robust urban archaeological programs, often with municipal archaeology offices (Rothschild and diZerega Wall 2014:20–27). Elsewhere, Graff (2024) has argued that this can be understood as both a staffing issue within state and local archaeological agencies, academic institutions, and cultural research management firms and, more significantly, the misplaced assumption that the dynamic processes of urban life in Chicago preclude the possibility of any archaeological integrity. Instead, as we argue below, it should be evident that urban transformations are captured within the record, most notably, the archaeological signature of urban renewal that transformed the city’s South Side. In recent years, important archaeological research in and about Chicago has been undertaken and published. This includes research at the Great Migration site of the Phyllis Wheatley Home (Agbe-Davies 2010, 2011), the company town of Pullman (Baxter 2012), the former site of the 1893 World’s Columbian Exposition (Graff 2011, 2012, 2020; Graff and Edwards 2018; Tolmie and Porubcan Branster 2018), a purported Underground Railroad site in Old Irving Park (Graff 2019), the Adler and Sullivan–designed Charnley-Persky House (Charnley-Persky House Museum 2022; Graff 2020), the Mecca Flats (Graff 2024), and the Civil War–era and Great Migration–era site of Camp Douglas (Camp Douglas Restoration Foundation 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2018, 2019; Peterson and Gregory 2023). Together with the authors of the other articles in this special issue, we are hopeful that historic-period archaeological research in Chicago will continue and expand, demonstrating the contributions that the archaeological record, in concert with Chicago’s documentary and oral historical records, can make to our understanding of American urban experiences. This article, written in the days immediately after we concluded an archaeological field school with undergraduate students from Lake Forest College and Morton College on the campus of the Illinois Institute of Technology (IIT), is not a fully conclusive interpretation of our findings. Our research at the former sites of the Armour Mission (built 1886; demolished 1962) and the Armour Flats (built 1888; demolished 1961) has already produced exciting materials related to the MCJA 49_2 Graff_Martino.indd 2 4/3/24 8:49 AM MIDCONTINENTAL JOURNAL OF ARCHAEOLOGY 3 processes of urban renewal that created the current site, but we will only understand them better after fall laboratory analysis. In lieu of this understanding, we offer an overview of the themes, processes, and relationships that we sought out to lift another story of Chicago history to the surface, as well as the stakes for doing historical archaeology in the architecture-dominated context of contemporary Chicago. Site History The Armours and Their Institutions Armour and Company, under various names, was once Chicago’s largest meatpacking company, and its processed meats are still abundantly found on supermarket shelves today. It was founded in 1867 by Philip Danforth Armour Sr. (1832–1901; Wade 2005). Originally from upstate New York, Armour first began business as a meatpacker in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, in 1859, primarily packing pork (Leech and Carroll 1938:2). He moved his business to Chicago in 1875 (Commission on Chicago Landmarks 2004:5). Armour created a highly profitable business once he and other Chicago packers—Gustavus Swift, Nelson Morris, and Michael Cudahy—convinced a skeptical public that low prices were worth consumers’ unease with sourcing meat from farther afield than from traditional slaughterhouses or local butchers. This “disassembly line” business of turning hogs, cows, and other animals into portable cuts of meat for mass distribution and consumption and its tie to Chicago’s system of railroads and technological innovations, like refrigerated railcars, have been extensively studied (e.g., Cronon 1991). They provided the keys to Armour’s success, as did his strikebreaking and his choosing to maintain unsafe and unhygienic working conditions for his labor force (e.g., Sinclair 1906). Armour’s business acumen, coupled with his philanthropic impulses, led him to create the Armour Mission, the Armour Flats, and the Armour Institute (later, the Illinois Institute of Technology, or IIT). The Armour Mission (Figure 1; Burnham and Root—architects, 1886), located at Thirty-Third Street and Armour Avenue (now Federal Street), was built to house a nonsectarian church congregation, but it quickly evolved to become a quasi-settlement house not dissimilar to Jane Addams’s famous Hull-House. The settlement-house movement began in 1884 with the creation of Toynbee Hall in London’s East End by “university-educated, middle-class Christians” who wanted to allay social unrest and class conflict via “close, daily, and personal association with the poor” (Reinders 1982:40, 41). Early settlement houses in America were founded by those, such as Jane Addams, who had visited Toynbee Hall, and these settlement houses included New York’s University Settlement (1886) and Boston’s South End House (1891). Located in lower socioeconomic urban communities, they were centers for mutual aid and social change with various programs to assist working-class and immigrant men, women, and their families. MCJA 49_2 Graff_Martino.indd 3 4/3/24 8:49 AM 4 MIDCONTINENTAL JOURNAL OF ARCHAEOLOGY Figure 1. Photograph of the Armour Mission circa 1900–1930. (Used with permission from University Archives and Special Collections, Paul V. Galvin Library, Illinois Institute of Technology, 036.04.01, Office of Communications and Marketing photographs, 1905–1999, Box BB-1, Folder 1.) Sponsored by brothers Philip and Joseph Armour (1842–1881), the Romanesque Revival–style Armour Mission was initially an expansion of the nearby Plymouth Congregational Church, founded in 1874 and by 1875 led by the popular preacher Professor David Swing. The congregation quickly outgrew its initial buildings, which at one point included a former saloon (Armour Mission 1905:25). This area, near Chicago’s famous Union Stockyards and “Packingtown,” was home to many recently arrived European immigrants who the established white elite felt lacked necessary “cultural resources” and “social agencies” (Macauley 1978:6). At the same time, Black Americans were moving into the area in significant numbers beginning in the 1870s. Between 1850 and 1870, Chicago’s Black population grew from 320 to 3,700, though the new migrants were restricted to a narrow stretch of the city known as the “Black Belt” (Commission on Chicago Landmarks 1994:2). Joseph Armour died in 1881 and bequeathed $100,000 to establish the Mission’s new building (Armour Mission 1905:9). His hiring of Daniel Hudson Burnham (1846–1912) and John Wellborn Root (1850–1891) to design the new structure connected Armour’s endeavor to the rising stars of these commercial architects, who would soon be chosen to direct the architectural program of the 1893 World’s Columbian Exposition. While the new Mission originally hosted MCJA 49_2 Graff_Martino.indd 4 4/3/24 8:49 AM MIDCONTINENTAL JOURNAL OF ARCHAEOLOGY 5 church services, its programs expanded to include a kindergarten, a trade school, a library, a boys’ military brigade (the Armour Cadets) and girls’ drill corps, the Armour Chorus, night courses for job seekers, and a medical dispensary. Many of these activity groups toured the country, and the drill corps received an award after its performance at the 1893 World’s Columbian Exposition (Armour Mission 1905:48). By 1895, the building served 2,200 students and 130 teachers and included an auditorium that could hold 1,200 people (Armour Mission 1905:11). In 1938, the structure was remodeled and used as the Student Union Building of the Armour Institute of Technology and its successor, IIT (Schulze 2005:28). It was demolished in 1962. The Armour Flats (Figure 2; Patton & Fisher—architects, 1888) were built to house Armour meatpacking employees as well as to provide income to support the work of the Armour Mission (Armour Mission 1905:25; Chicago Tribune [CT], 14 December 1892:5). Indeed, it is important to understand the essential financial connections between the two. The Mission . . . needed and used money so Armour had a “row of flats” built with about two hundred apartments. The upper employees of Armour and Co. and some officials were expected to rent them and live there. It was near to their place of business. . . . But the flats offered a way for the pay-roll of Armour and Co. to carry a large portion of the mission expense [Leech and Carroll 1938:211]. Figure 2. Drawing or engraving of the Armour Institute, Mission, and Flats, 1899. The section of the Flats we excavated is directly to the left of the Mission. (Courtesy of University Archives and Special Collections, Paul V. Galvin Library, Illinois Institute of Technology, 002.04.09, Armour Institute of Technology slide.) MCJA 49_2 Graff_Martino.indd 5 4/3/24 8:49 AM 6 MIDCONTINENTAL JOURNAL OF ARCHAEOLOGY Normand Patton and Reynolds Fisher were well known for their institutional architecture, including the designs of several Carnegie libraries, when they were chosen to design the Flats (Commission on Chicago Landmarks 2004:2). The 29 buildings that made up the Flats were arranged in a quadrangle around Thirty-Third Street, Thirty-Fourth Street, Armour Avenue, and Dearborn Avenue; each building was three or four stories high and was designed to appear like a single-family home (Bluestone 1998:389; Schulze 2005:29). Made up of 194 apartments, the Flats did initially house the officials and upper-level employees of Armour & Company but soon held other tenants, including faculty and students at the Armour Institute (Macauley 1978:11). The Flats were demolished gradually, beginning in 1917. By the 1930s, the structure was repurposed to house the Institute’s civil engineering, fire protection engineering, and social science departments and, by 1938, was solely used for the Armour Research Foundation (ARF). The section of the Flats where we excavated had been demolished in 1961. The Armour Institute’s establishment postdates the creation of the Mission and the Flats, though it became integral to their continued success. In 1890, after hearing the sermon “If I Had a Million Dollars,” preached by the Mission’s resident pastor, Frank Gunsaulus, Philip Armour decided to use his wheat and meatpacking earnings to found a technical institute. It offered courses in “electrical engineering, mechanical engineering, chemistry, architecture, and library science” with an associated “Scientific Academy” providing training in “domestic arts, kindergarten teaching, commerce, and music” (Macauley 1978:18–19). The still extant Armour Main Building (Patton & Fisher—architects) was constructed in 1891–1893 to house it. And it grew: In 1893, the Art Institute merged its school of architecture with the Armour Institute, and in 1940, Chicago’s Lewis Institute likewise merged its programs with the Armour. Bronzeville and the Growth of the Black Metropolis The white business leaders of Chicago, among them Philip Armour, Potter Palmer, George Pullman, Gustavus Swift, and Marshall Field, “assumed a somewhat paternalistic interest in the Negro community as part of their general pattern of philanthropy and civic responsibility” (Drake and Cayton 1993 [1945]:57).Yet this was not geared toward liberation or equity: They were “liberal in their contributions to Black Belt institutions and willing to employ them in servant capacities” but not more than that (Drake and Cayton 1993 [1945]:57). These men died between 1897 and 1906, before the Great Migration would further transform Chicago, but by then, Drake and Cayton write, there was an increasing move to Black agency, to “racial self-reliance” (Drake and Cayton 1993 [1945]:57). As in other urban centers, as well as in some rural enclaves in the United States, the Black “Mecca” of Chicago offered economic and cultural opportunities as a place of “black agency” (Roberts and Matos 2022). MCJA 49_2 Graff_Martino.indd 6 4/3/24 8:49 AM MIDCONTINENTAL JOURNAL OF ARCHAEOLOGY 7 During the 1920s, the area surrounding the Armour Institute developed into Chicago’s “Black Metropolis”—the vibrant “city within a city” that formed through Black agency as well as restrictive covenants that concentrated the Black population within a narrow area of the South Side (Drake and Cayton 1993 [1945]:12; Graff 2024). By 1900, this Black Belt ran from downtown southward to approximately Thirty-Ninth Steet, and westward to Wabash Avenue (Bluestone 1998:391). While there was a large jump in the Black population in Chicago in 1870, nothing would compare to the changes brought by the first years of the Great Migration (ca.1915–1920), as Black individuals and families left the rural south for urban centers in the north and west in search of socioeconomic opportunity. Between 1910 and 1920, there was a 150% increase in Chicago’s Black population to 110,000 (Commission on Chicago Landmarks 1994:2). Much has been written about the Black Metropolis’s famed and lost building the Mecca Flats (1892–1952). A few publications deserve special mention: Daniel Bluestone’s thorough analysis of the built history of the site (1998); Thomas Dyja’s popular history of postwar Chicago (2013); and a bounty of work drawing from Pulitzer Prize–winner Gwendolyn Brooks’s long poem In the Mecca (1968). The Mecca Flats, bounded by Thirty-Third and Thirty-Fourth Streets, Dearborn Avenue, and State Street, were across the road from the Armour Flats. And, like the changing neighborhood around the Armour Flats, the Mecca’s tenancy changed from all white to majority Black between 1912, when Black tenants were first allowed to rent there, and the 1920 Census (Bluestone 1998:391). The area surrounding both Armour and Mecca Flats was the center of Black business and culture, despite the ravages of the 1919 riot. The area of south State Street from Twenty-Sixth through Thirty-Ninth Streets was known as “the Stroll” and was made up of music venues, restaurants, and other businesses (Tierney 2008:31). One of these was Jesse Binga’s Binga Bank, on State just north of Thirty-Fifth Street, eventually alongside his later construction, the Binga Arcade (Commission on Chicago Landmarks 1994:46). Binga’s Bank, established in 1908, was the first Black-owned bank in Chicago, and its second location at Thirty-Fifth and State was demolished by IIT in the 1970s (Commission on Chicago Landmarks 1994:46). The loss of many of these historic buildings, like Binga Bank, and the stories found within them was the impetus for the initial Bronzeville-Black Metropolis Plan, a heritage and landmarking project, submitted to the City of Chicago in 1984 (Commission on Chicago Landmarks 1994). Urban Renewal and the Death of the Mecca Flats The biggest changes to the area that we explored archaeologically were put into motion by the hiring of famed German Bauhaus architect Ludwig Mies van der Rohe (1886–1969) as director of the School of Architecture, though he was assisted in realizing his vision by the larger social forces of urban renewal, as well as MCJA 49_2 Graff_Martino.indd 7 4/3/24 8:49 AM 8 MIDCONTINENTAL JOURNAL OF ARCHAEOLOGY by the way redlining, restrictive covenants, and blockbusting had already shaped Chicago’s Black Belt. Mies developed a master plan for the new Illinois Institute of Technology campus that both presupposed and pushed forward the continuing destruction of properties within the center of the Black Metropolis. Urban renewal is the term used to describe the legislatively backed practices that displace already marginalized communities nationwide in an effort develop those areas they occupy for other purposes, including the expansion of university campuses (see Mullins 2006; Mullins and Jones 2011). In Chicago, the campuses of the University of Chicago, the University of Illinois at Chicago, and IIT were expanded through the “funds, lands, and mechanisms” afforded when these mid-twentieth-century measures were passed (Haar 2010:53). Like the slum clearance movements of the nineteenth century and the New Deal legislation of the 1930s, these postwar laws, like the 1949 and 1954 Housing Acts and the 1956 Federal Highway Act, were framed as solutions to provide economic opportunity and prevent further decline in underresourced majority-minority neighborhoods. And, like those other measures, the solutions often further disadvantaged those they were ostensibly intended to benefit. In Chicago, 64% of the 22,950 families displaced through urban-renewal projects between 1950 and 1963 were nonwhite (Digital Scholarship Lab 2007–2023). The Illinois Tech Redevelopment Project from 1957 to 1967 displaced 329 families—all people of color—from the vicinity of the campus while receiving $2,315,074 in federal funding (Department of Housing and Urban Development 1981:43; Digital Scholarship Lab 2007–2023). IIT bought the Mecca Flats in 1941 and shortly afterward attempted to evict its tenants. This plan was overcome by Illinois State Senator Christopher Columbus Wimbish Jr. and five other Black members of the legislature who passed a housing measure to block it. Yet IIT continue to ignore the maintenance and tenant needs of the Mecca and surrounding properties, rendering them “blighted” through a concentrated program of neglect (Graff 2024). The Mecca was demolished in 1952, one of thirty nearby buildings purchased and subsequently demolished by IIT to expand its campus (CT 18 January 1953:S7). Today, the area we excavated is covered with grass, soil, and a small gravel parklet shaded by trees on its eastern and western edges (Figure 3). As IIT comes to grips with its role in urban renewal, the area is changing with the newly created Bronzeville–Black Metropolis National Heritage Area. This 2022 federal designation will aid community members, businesses, and institutions in meeting historic preservation and economic expansion goals for over 200 locations in the area, including the IIT campus. The work covered here will ultimately be used to shed light on this period and provide materials for an upcoming campus exhibit. Summer Research Focus and Preliminary Results The site we settled on was chosen for its multivalent potential research themes. The small grass lawn located next to IIT’s Galvin Library had materials that may MCJA 49_2 Graff_Martino.indd 8 4/3/24 8:49 AM MIDCONTINENTAL JOURNAL OF ARCHAEOLOGY 9 Figure 3. Lake Forest College and Morton College students (Ian Carranza, Joseph Ridarelli, and Callie Elms) excavate the former Armour Mission and Armour Flats sites at IIT with modernist Galvin Library in the background. (Photograph by Rebecca S. Graff, 2023.) potentially help interpret a quasi-settlement house (the Mission), a domestic site (the Flats), institutional spaces (Armour Institute), and—our primary interest— the archaeological signature of urban renewal (see Ryzewski and Graff 2024). A look at the Armour Institute may also link more broadly to an industrial archaeology of the meatpacking site, a commercial archaeology of business centers, and a domestic archaeology of the country farms and mansions that the Armours and their “robber baron” brethren built on Chicago’s North Shore. Although a site on the Stroll or the former Binga Bank would have been even more aligned with this project’s goals, the ease of excavating without heavy equipment made this site the best place for training undergraduate archaeologists. When deciding where to place our excavation units, we worked off a 1912 Sanborn fire insurance map of the area that we laid over a current satellite map (Figure 4; Sanborn Map Company 1912). The chosen area lay just to the north of the Galvin Library and sloped down toward Thirty-Third Street to the north. Graff calculated the probable distance from current landmarks, such as the sidewalk and streets, to the corners and interiors of architecture and courtyards on the old maps, and we used a measuring wheel to establish four 1 × 1 m excavation units (EUs). EU 1 was placed in the area of the Armour Mission; on a more detailed map of the site, the unit seems to have been near or within the kitchen addition dating from circa 1938. We would have liked to place more units within the Mission MCJA 49_2 Graff_Martino.indd 9 4/3/24 8:49 AM 10 MIDCONTINENTAL JOURNAL OF ARCHAEOLOGY Figure 4. 1912 Sanborn fire insurance map of the area laid over a current satellite map. The rectangle at the top demarcates the excavation site. (Map by Shannon Martino, 2023.) footprint, but that area had long ago been planted with trees, like lindens, whose roots made digging both quite difficult and a threat to the health of the trees. EUs 2 and 4 were placed in areas we speculated would reveal debris from the demolition of the Armour Flats. The last of the initial excavation units, EU 3, was placed in an area we thought might contain the refuse and debris from the courtyard of the flats. We surmised that, by choosing these areas, we might reveal the most distinct deposits to be found at the site. Were we to expand our study, we might also choose the street-facing area of the Flats on the north edge of the block. This would have been EU 5. EU 1 ended up reaching a depth of 62 cm below surface, and while nothing was found in situ given the bioturbation caused by the tree roots in that area, this square yielded some of the most varied finds. Artifacts recovered from the unit included animal bone, a blue glass bead, mosaic tiles, privacy glass, and lead-glazed white earthenware plate fragments. This unit also yielded some decorative bricks that likely were once part of the elaborate brick façade of the Mission. The students excavating EU 2 began, within the first 20 cm, to find evidence of the 1961 demolition of the site—a jumble of bricks, metal, slag, coal, asbestos tile, and cloth. We assumed that this was all that would be found there, but at a depth of approximately 25 cm below the surface, we identified what seemed to MCJA 49_2 Graff_Martino.indd 10 4/3/24 8:49 AM MIDCONTINENTAL JOURNAL OF ARCHAEOLOGY 11 be in situ architecture (a coursed limestone wall). At this point, the excavation unit was expanded to include EU 7 to the east to trace out more of the architecture. After excavating the same demolition debris as was in EU 2, enough limestone was found to identify the architecture as basement walls, likely the foundation for the flat above. Due to the presence of painted plaster on the limestone that covered the interior face of the basement walls, we determined that debris had been pushed into the basement during demolition. With EU 4 and its eastward expansion, it took longer to reach the demolition debris, 25–30 cm below the surface, but once reached, the students more quickly revealed the limestone walls than they had in EU 2, with the first limestone showing at 30 cm below surface, slightly out of course, and with the coursed limestone slightly below (Figure 5). The paint on the walls was much more elusive here; some seemed to have been applied directly on the stone, while flakes were also detected during digging. This led us to determine that this excavation square also found the interior of the basement. Unlike EUs 2 and 7, however, EUs 4 and 6 had a sand foundation fill that surrounded the walls. In the other excavation units, it has been harder to distinguish between sand fill and the natural geological layers of the area, especially given the lack of such studies in the area so far. EU 3 was placed higher on the grassy slope, so it is not surprising that the in situ material in that location was much deeper, at 56 cm below the ground level. Once the limestone walls were located, we expanded that unit into EU 8. Much more sand was used as fill for this area of the site in EUs 2, 4, 6, and 7, perhaps because the slope was essential to the Mies plan for the area. Though we were able to determine little about the wall’s character, EU 3’s expansion—EU 8—was almost entirely a midden filled with coal ash and trash. Once analyzed, the contents of that trash will undoubtedly provide valuable insight into the lives of the Flat’s tenants. Figure 5. Coursed limestone, EUs 4 and 6. (Photograph by Rebecca S. Graff, 2023.) MCJA 49_2 Graff_Martino.indd 11 4/3/24 8:49 AM 12 MIDCONTINENTAL JOURNAL OF ARCHAEOLOGY Chicago’s municipal trash collection regime was haphazard and dependent on contracted labor well into the second decade of the twentieth century, even after passage of the 1911 Sanitary Code (Graff 2020:154–158). Those who lived in the Amour Flats would have had to hire independent contractors to remove their waste or simply burn their trash and dispose of it in middens like this one. Many of the artifacts will require further examination before we can discuss them, but a few deserve mention here along with our preliminary research and thoughts. Every excavation unit contained bricks clearly stamped “PKB Co.” The stamp was identified by our student Callie Elms as that of the Purington-Kimbell Brick Company. This company was once the largest brick manufacturer in Chicago and was one of several firms that greatly expanded due to increased needs for construction materials after the 1871 Chicago fire. The company initially used clay from the Chicago River and by 1882 used a Chambers stiff mud machine to increase their output from clay beds by the Illinois and Michigan Canal (Purington 1888). By 1891, the Purington-Kimbell Brick Company produced twice as many bricks as their nearest competitor (Leslie 2010:75). The bricks from the IIT site are a mix of interior bricks and face bricks with slightly different treatments based on their location in the structure. For example, the face bricks have a smooth, darker red slip than the interior bricks. A further examination of the brick components will make this clear, but the fabric of all the bricks seems to be the same, pointing to the same manufacturer using various methods based on the function of the desired brick. Evidence of food consumption was most common in areas identified with the kitchen space of the Mission (EU 1) and a midden (EUs 3 and 8). We identified several types of meat with the assistance of archaeologist Edward F. Maher, an expert in faunal analysis who stopped by the excavation during our open house. He identified sheep and cow bones, to which we later added some bird bones, likely from chicken. The assemblage includes ribs and smaller bones, bones with cut marks, and bones that were clearly sawn by professional meatpackers. A Coca-Cola bottle, circa 1945, was found on one of the last days of excavation, which showed the local manufacture of the bottle for this national product (Figure 6). Children are often overlooked in archaeological studies, with the idea being that the archaeological record might not contain extensive evidence of that culturally specific life stage (see Baxter 2005). This is also true when considering the documentary record of IIT and similar institutions that housed the families of their faculty, staff, and students on their campuses. The artifacts from the excavation units placed in the Flats reminded us that children too can leave an archaeological record of their presence. Quite early in the excavation of EU 4, the students uncovered the feet of a porcelain doll, and on the last day of excavation, we recovered a painted lead soldier from the midden area of EU 8. While the U.S. Census records clearly enumerate the presence of children in the Armour Flats, these artifacts are an even more intimate and immediate look at the social lives of the Flats dwellers and will be studied more in the laboratory. MCJA 49_2 Graff_Martino.indd 12 4/3/24 8:49 AM MIDCONTINENTAL JOURNAL OF ARCHAEOLOGY 13 Figure 6. Base of Coca-Cola bottle, circa 1945, showing “Chicago, ILL.” as the place of bottle manufacture. (Photograph by Rebecca S. Graff, 2023.) We also found the debris of infrastructure—including the typical salt-glazed sewer pipes, gas pipes, and electric conduits—to varying degrees in all units. Probably the most common debris items, however, were slag and coal. In EU 2, several strange red tiles were found for which we had no explanation until one was washed on the day that the local the Afro-American Genealogical and Historical Society of Chicago (AAGHSC), led by Sherry Williams, visited. A couple of the members immediately identified it as an asbestos tile used for flooring in many of the neighborhood households during their youth in the 1950s and 1960s. The AAGHSC was founded in 1979 and remains one of the oldest Black genealogical societies in the country (AAGHSC 2021). Even though this group of nine men and women1 worked with us for but a brief time, their revelation proves how invaluable working with descendant and resident communities is for historical archaeology. MCJA 49_2 Graff_Martino.indd 13 4/3/24 8:49 AM 14 MIDCONTINENTAL JOURNAL OF ARCHAEOLOGY Community Engagement Of preeminent importance for this project is the new distinction of the study site as part of the Black Metropolis National Heritage Area. The archaeological materials from the former Armour Mission and the Armour Flats do address the structures of racism that produced the area, though not in as obvious and evocative a manner as does such work at the former Mecca Flats (Graff 2024). The need to find out what the community of people living and working around the site were interested in was key to this research project. We consulted with the architects and architectural historians among the staff and faculty who were interested in hosting a more intentional and systematic archaeological study of the campus after the success of the work at Mecca Flats. We connected to IIT’s Department of Community Affairs and discussed the potential for collaborations with local K–12 students and arts organizations. We reached out to our colleagues at the Bronzeville Historical Society, founded by the abovementioned Sherry Williams, to discuss what questions we might be able to answer archaeologically, and we checked with the Facilities Management team at IIT to see if there was any construction planned for the summer that we could monitor, like the work done in 2018 on Crown Hall that revealed parts of the Mecca Flats. While we were successful with some of our goals, others could not be realized to their full potential given scheduling and pedagogical constraints. Still, a few important collaborations deserve mention because they are at the heart of the reason behind engaging in the archaeology of Bronzeville. As they were with Graff’s work at the Mecca site in 2018, the faculty, staff, and students of IIT were invaluable partners in the work. They gave lectures to our students, shared archival sources, regularly visited the site and responded to our questions, and made it clear that they were open to the sorts of insights about a place they knew well and would be enhanced by archaeological resources. Another important collaboration that is still under way involves contemporary artist and educator Jan Tichy, with whom Graff and her colleague Krysta Ryzewski (Wayne State University) collaborated on another archaeological-art project in Detroit (Williams 2021). Tichy is a faculty member at the nearby School of the Art Institute whose work has focused on some of the same issues of urban renewal (Project Cabrini Green 2011) and erasure and trauma (Tichy 2021), as well as on Bauhaus artist and former director of IIT’s Institute of Design László Moholy-Nagy (Tichy and Robin Schuldenfrei 2019), about whom he coauthored a book and designed an exhibition. Tichy volunteered on the excavation and connected us with his students, as well as with his colleagues at the nearby South Side Community Art Center. A future cross-disciplinary project will center on the artifacts recovered from the excavation and will involve students from several institutions. Finally, while we acknowledge our positionality and authority inherent in this excavation itself, it would be overly strong to suggest that academics from any discipline are the ultimate authorities on these local histories. As Kelly Britt reminds MCJA 49_2 Graff_Martino.indd 14 4/3/24 8:49 AM MIDCONTINENTAL JOURNAL OF ARCHAEOLOGY 15 us in her article on moving beyond consultation to collaboration around Section 106, invoking Uzma Rizvi’s words on a decolonizing praxis, “unless we choose to decolonize aesthetics, pedagogy, or archaeology, the systems by which we are taught research continue to reinstate older, oppressive, racist, chauvinist, patriarchal models of being: that gets coded into all of us and we continue to replicate it’’ (Rizvi 2015:88, cited in Britt 2019:505). This is but one facet of an overall reckoning with disciplines, authority, and how we interpret and/or preserve “heritage” in a post–George Floyd and Breonna Taylor United States. After we fully analyze the information uncovered in this project, we will share the results with our community partners and see what responses, correctives, or new questions for future research emerge. Conclusion In her award-winning book All That She Carried: The Journey of Ashley’s Sack, a Black Family Keepsake (2021), historian Tiya Miles traces and expands the narratives around a small cotton bag that was passed down through generations of a Black family, beginning with the enslaved mother who initially filled it “with my love” (Miles 2021:5) as she was sold away from her daughter. With close attention to the messages of material culture and landscape, Miles reflects on what a tremendous accomplishment it was to have Ashley’s sack in the record at all, not to mention in its current location in the National Museum of African American History and Culture. She writes that, in the vast majority of circumstances, “African American things had little chance to last” (Miles 2021:265). Our goal was never to find material proxies for the experiences of the residents of Armour Mission, the inhabitants of Armour Flats, Armour Institute members, or Black Metropolis denizens. We knew that we would be looking at a landscape shaped by the forces of urban renewal, which would then allow us to consider all the meanings made at the site. As Whitney Battle-Baptiste describes, in setting up her Black Feminist Archaeology, “if landscape is a stage for human action, it both reflects past activities and encodes the cultural landscape in which people’s views of the world are formed” (Battle-Baptiste 2011:100). We excavated a landscape that continues to hold contested and sometimes antithetical meanings, where actions against one group for the benefit of another continue to play out. In the months to come, we will derive further insight into these meanings as we analyze the finds, and we will add our analyses to the public contestations over the meanings of Chicago’s urban landscape. Even those with the privilege to not deal with racism on a daily basis must reckon with the “revolting” ways that racism is entrenched and made material through the built environment (Mullins 2020). In Chicago, archaeological research can make useful contributions to the elevation of these stories. Anna Agbe-Davies, in writing about her research on Bronzeville’s Phyllis Wheatley Home, reminds us that “the idea that archaeology can be good for something besides discovering information MCJA 49_2 Graff_Martino.indd 15 4/3/24 8:49 AM 16 MIDCONTINENTAL JOURNAL OF ARCHAEOLOGY about the past is self-evident to many archaeologists” (2010:173). It can be used to further community interpretations, to raise alternative or displaced narratives, and to serve as an evocative catalyst for future efforts to promote equity and inclusion. Cities like Chicago “are dynamic environments composed of multiple and often competing layers of place-based and community histories, materials, and memories” (Ryzewski and Graff 2024). Given that only 2% of the 90,000 locations listed on the National Register are sites associated with Black history (Cep 2020:3), we hope that this exhibit, dialogue, and resultant programming and educational materials can illuminate the processes that continue to influence equity and justice in Chicago. If that means we also add more archaeological sites to the register in their service, then that is an added benefit. Elsewhere, Graff has argued that we need a “Chicago Archaeological Research unit, funded and bolstered by city, state, or federal government in partnership with Chicago-based, occupationally-secure researchers as well as historic preservation offices” to truly integrate the potential of archaeology into dominant narratives of the city (Graff 2024). We also want to think about what working more intentionally with historic preservationists and architects might look like in this city full of architourism and architectural organizations. Archaeology in and of Chicago can reveal “deeper and more accurate insights” about its citizens (Graff 2024). Collaborative research projects like our work at IIT—between institutions, among disciplines, and with community members, volunteers, tourists, and local media—must be a part of metropolitan Chicago’s landscape. Note 1. Along with Sherry Williams, we were fortunate to have the help of Deborah Corney, Desiree Booker, Nettie Nesbary, Pamela Pickett, Richard Roak, Steve Williams, Sylvia Mills, and Carolyn Driver-McGee. Acknowledgments We thank the faculty, staff, and students of the Illinois Institute of Technology for hosting us and allowing us to excavate their campus. Michelangelo Sabatino, Alicia Bunton, Mark Osorio, Bruce Watts, and Kevin Gallagher were integral to the project. IIT University archivist Mindy Pugh provided essential resources in all stages of our research. We thank our respective institutions, Lake Forest College (Graff ) and Morton College (Martino), for supporting this teaching and research. Graff thanks the Dean of Faculty’s Office and the American Studies Program at Lake Forest College for additional funding. Martino acknowledges that support was provided through the college’s Department of Education Title III: Strengthening Institutions Program grant, award number P031A190100. Our teaching assistant, Kirsten Lengfelder (LFC 2023), was indispensable to the success of the field school. Finally, our most sincere thanks to our 2023 field-school students and volunteers for all their work. They are Tabitha Andrews, Kris Bostick, Andreas Chitu, Ian Cox, Callie Elms, Riley Groak, Briana Guzman, Mia Lee, Katie Pike, Joseph Ridarelli, Sofia Santana, Sydney Tran, Theresa Wilhite, and Emma Zagaiski (Lake Forest College); Ian Carranza (Morton College); and volunteers Jan Tichy, Andrew Leith, and Emmanuel Soto. MCJA 49_2 Graff_Martino.indd 16 4/3/24 8:49 AM MIDCONTINENTAL JOURNAL OF ARCHAEOLOGY 17 Disclosure Statement The authors state that there is no conflict of interest. Notes on Contributors Rebecca S. Graff is a historical archaeologist and associate professor of anthropology at Lake Forest College (PhD and MA, University of Chicago; BA, University of California, Berkeley). Her book Disposing of Modernity: The Archaeology of Garbage and Consumerism During Chicago’s 1893 World’s Fair (2020) was based on an archaeological and archival project focusing on the ephemeral “White City” and Midway Plaisance of the 1893 Chicago world’s fair and the modern disposal practices seen at the Louis Sullivan-designed Charnley-Persky House. Shannon Martino is an archaeologist and art historian who specializes in archaeological ceramic illustration and ceramic analysis. Martino graduated from the University of Chicago with a BA in anthropology, earned her PhD in art history from the University of Pennsylvania, and has participated in archaeological projects in Bulgaria, Turkey, Syria, Iraq, and now Chicago. She is a professor at Morton College in Cicero, Illinois. References Afro-American Genealogical and Historical Society of Chicago (2021) About Us. Electronic document, https://aaghsc.org/about-us/, accessed June 25, 2023. Agbe-Davies, Anna S. (2010) Archaeology as a Tool to Illuminate and Support Community Struggles in the Black Metropolis of the Twentieth and Twenty-First Centuries. Public Archaeology 9(4):171–193. Agbe-Davies, Anna S. (2011) Reaching for Freedom, Seizing Responsibility: Archaeology at the Phyllis Wheatley Home for Girls, Chicago. In The Materiality of Freedom: Archaeologies of Postemancipation Life, edited by Jodi A. Barnes, pp. 69–86. University of South Carolina Press, Columbia. Armour Mission (1905) An Illustrated Historical Sketch of Armour Mission: Containing also a Directory of the Sunday School and its Tributary Organizations. Armour Mission, Chicago. Battle-Baptiste, Whitney (2011) Black Feminist Archaeology. Routledge, London. Baxter, Jane E. (2005) The Archaeology of Childhood: Children, Gender, and Material Culture. AltaMira, Walnut Creek, California. Baxter, Jane E. (2012) The Paradox of a Capitalist Utopia: Visionary Ideals and Lived Experience in the Pullman Community 1880–1900. International Journal of Historical Archaeology 16(4):651–665. Bluestone, Daniel M. (1998) Chicago’s Mecca Flat Blues. Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians 57(4):382–403. Britt, Kelly M. (2019) Collaborating on the Federal Level: Moving Beyond Mandated Consultation in the Section 106 Process. Archaeologies: Journal of the World Archaeological Congress 15(3):496–513. Brooks, Gwendolyn (1968) In the Mecca: Poems. Harper and Row, New York. Bruegmann, Robert (2008) Built Environment of the Chicago Region. In Chicago Neighborhoods and Suburbs: A Historical Guide, edited by Ann Durkin Keating, pp. 76–85. University of Chicago Press, Chicago. Camp Douglas Restoration Foundation (2013) Report of Archaeological Excavation October 25– 29, 2013. Electronic document, https://www.campdouglas.org/wp-content/uploads/2013 /12/CDRF-Report-2013.pdf, accessed March 14, 2024. MCJA 49_2 Graff_Martino.indd 17 4/3/24 8:49 AM 18 MIDCONTINENTAL JOURNAL OF ARCHAEOLOGY Camp Douglas Restoration Foundation (2014) Report of Archaeological Excavation May 14–22, 2014. Electronic document, http://www.campdouglas.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/07 /CDRF-Report-2014.pdf, accessed March 14, 2024. Camp Douglas Restoration Foundation (2015) Report of Archaeological Excavation June 25–July 1, 2015. Electronic document, http://www.campdouglas.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/07 /CDRF-Report-Spring-20151.pdf, accessed March 14, 2024. Camp Douglas Restoration Foundation (2016) Report of Archaeological Excavation May 18–26, 2016. Electronic document, http://www.campdouglas.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/10 /CDRF-Report-Spring-2016.pdf, accessed March 14, 2024. Camp Douglas Restoration Foundation (2018) Report of Archaeological Excavation October 29– 31, 2017, April 19–26, 2018. Electronic document, http://www.campdouglas.org/wp-content /uploads/2018/06/CDRF-Report-Fall-2017-18.pdf, accessed March 14, 2024. Camp Douglas Restoration Foundation (2019) Report of Saineghi Archaeological Excavation, October 29–31, 2017, April 19–26, 2018, May 9–16- 2019. Electronic document, http://www.camp douglas.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/Saineghi-report.pdf, accessed March 14, 2024. Cep, Casey (2020) The Fight to Preserve African-American History. New Yorker, February 3:26–31. Charnley-Persky House Museum (2022) The City Beyond the White City: Race, Two Chicago Homes, and Their Neighborhoods. Electronic exhibition, https://www.beyondthewhitecity .org/exhibiton, accessed June 12, 2023. Chicago Tribune [CT] (1892) Armour’s Great Gift: Interesting Points about the Manual Training School. Chicago Tribune. 14 December:5. Chicago Tribune [CT] (1953) Rapid Growth of I.I.T. Campus Cited in Report. 18 January:S7. City of Chicago (2023) Chicago Landmarks: Individual and Landmark Districts Designated as of December 4, 2023. Electronic document, https://www.chicago.gov/content/dam/city/depts /zlup/Historic_Preservation/Publications/Chicago_Landmark_Name_List_4DEC2023.pdf, accessed March 14, 2024. Commission on Chicago Landmarks (1994) The Black Metropolis-Bronzeville District. Chicago Department of Planning and Development, Chicago. Electronic document, http://npshistory .com/publications/nha/bronzeville-black-metropolis/info-sum.pdf, accessed March 14, 2024. Commission on Chicago Landmarks (2004) Main Building and Machinery Hall, Illinois Institute of Technology, 3300–20 S. Federal St. & 100 W. 33rd St. Chicago Department of Planning and Development, Chicago. Electronic document, https://ia800702.us.archive.org/5/items/CityOf ChicagoLandmarkDesignationReports/Main-machineryHallIit.pdf, accessed March 14, 2024. Cronon, William (1991) Nature’s Metropolis: Chicago and the Great West. W. W. Norton, New York. Department of Housing and Urban Development (1981) Final Grant Reports 1951–1981. General Records of the Department of Housing and Urban Development 1931–2003, Record Group 207. National Archives, College Park, Maryland. Digital Scholarship Lab (2007–2023) “Renewing Inequality: Urban Renewal, Family Displacements, and Race 1950–1966.” American Panorama, edited by Robert K. Nelson and Edward L. Ayers. Electronic document, https://dsl.richmond.edu/panorama/renewal/#view=0/0 /1&viz=cartogram&city=chicagoIL&loc=11/41.8730/-87.6340&project=2468&text=defining, accessed June 25, 2023. Drake, St. Clair, and Horace R. Cayton (1993 [1945]) Black Metropolis: A Study of Negro Life in a Northern City. University of Chicago Press, Chicago. Dyja, Thomas (2013) The Third Coast: When Chicago Built the American Dream. Penguin, New York. Graff, Rebecca S. (2011) Being Toured While Digging Tourism: Excavating Chicago’s 1893 World’s Columbian Exposition. International Journal of Historical Archaeology 15(2):222–235. Graff, Rebecca S. (2012) Dream City, Plaster City: World’s Fairs and the Gilding of American Material Culture. International Journal of Historical Archaeology 16(4):696–716. MCJA 49_2 Graff_Martino.indd 18 4/3/24 8:49 AM MIDCONTINENTAL JOURNAL OF ARCHAEOLOGY 19 Graff, Rebecca S. (2019) An Ardent Anti-Slavery Tale: Narrating Resistance through Chicago’s Underground Railroad, 1856–present. Journal of Community Archaeology and Heritage 6(2):85–97. Graff, Rebecca S. (2020) Disposing of Modernity: The Archaeology of Garbage and Consumerism during Chicago’s 1893 World’s Fair. University Press of Florida and the Society for Historical Archaeology, Gainesville. Graff, Rebecca S. (2024) An Archaeology of Chicago Archaeology: Urban Heritage Dissonances from DuSable to the Mecca Flats. Historical Archaeology, in press. Graff, Rebecca S., and Megan E. Edwards (2018) Fair-as-Foodway: Culinary Worlds and Modernizing Tastes at Chicago’s 1893 World’s Columbian Exposition. Historical Archaeology 52(4):420–437. Haar, Sharon (2010) The City as Campus: Urbanism and Higher Education in Chicago. University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis. Leech, Harper, and John Charles Carroll (1938) Armour and His Times. D. Appleton-Century, New York. Leslie, Thomas (2010) “Built Mostly of Itself”: The Chicago Brick Industry and the Masonry Skyscraper in the Late 19th Century. Construction History 25:69–84. Macauley, Irene (1978) The Heritage of Illinois Institute of Technology. Illinois Institute of Technology, Chicago. Miles, Tiya (2021) All That She Carried: The Journey of Ashley’s Sack, a Black Family Keepsake. Random House, New York. Mullins, Paul R. (2006) Racializing the Commonplace Landscape: An Archaeology of Urban Renewal along the Color Line. World Archaeology 38(1):60–71. Mullins, Paul R. (2020) Revolting Things: An Archaeology of Shameful Histories and Repulsive Realities. University Press of Florida, Gainesville. Mullins, Paul R., and Lewis C. Jones (2011) Archaeologies of Race and Urban Poverty: The Politics of Slumming, Engagement, and the Color Line. Historical Archaeology 4(1):33–50. National Park Service (2022) National Historic Landmarks Program. Electronic document, https://www.nps.gov/orgs/1582/index.htm, accessed February 27, 2022. National Register Database (2022) https://www.nps.gov/subjects/nationalregister/database -research.htm#table. Accessed February 27, 2022. Noel Hume, Ivor (1964) Archaeology: Handmaiden to History. North Carolina Historical Review 41(2):214–225. Petersen, Jane, and Michael M. Gregory (2023) Preserving Chicago’s Great Migration Legacy through Archaeology and Public Engagement. Journal of African Diaspora Archaeology and Heritage. DOI:10.1080/21619441.2023.2205701. Project Cabrini Green (2011) About. Project Cabrini Green. Electronic document, https://www .projectcabrinigreen.org/about.php, accessed June 25, 2023. Purington, D. V. (1888) Brick Manufacture Near Chicago. Transactions of the American Society of Civil Engineers 18(1):291–296. Reinders, Robert C. (1982) Toynbee Hall and the American Settlement Movement. Social Service Review 56(1):39–54. Rizvi, Uzma (2015) Decolonization as Care. In Slow Reader: A Resource for Design Thinking and Practice, edited by Ana Paula Pais and Carolyn F. Strauss, pp. 85–95. Astrid Vorstermans, Valiz, Amsterdam. Roberts, Andrea, and Melina Matos (2022) Adaptive Liminality: Bridging and Bonding Social Capital Between Urban and Rural Black Meccas. Journal of Urban Affairs 44(6):822–843. Rothschild, Nan A., and Diana diZerega Wall (2014) The Archaeology of American Cities. University Press of Florida, Gainesville. MCJA 49_2 Graff_Martino.indd 19 4/3/24 8:49 AM 20 MIDCONTINENTAL JOURNAL OF ARCHAEOLOGY Ryzewski, Krysta, and Rebecca S. Graff (2024) Confronting Bias and Representation in the Heritage of American Cities: Archaeological Approaches to Urban Renewal in Chicago and Detroit. Manuscript on file, Department of Sociology and Anthropology, Lake Forest College, Lake Forest, Illinois. Sanborn Map Company (1912) Sanborn Fire Insurance Map from Chicago, Cook County, Illinois, Vol. 4. Library of Congress. Electronic document, www.loc.gov/item/sanborn01790_021/, accessed March 14, 2024. Schulze, Franz (2005) Illinois Institute of Technology: Campus Guide. Princeton Architectural Press, New York. Sinclair, Upton (1906) The Jungle. Doubleday, Page and Company, New York. Tichy, Jan. (2021) All Monsters. Art installation, MOCAD, Detroit, Michigan. https://mocadetroit .org/all-monsters/, accessed June 25, 2023. Tichy, Jan, and Robin Schuldenfrei, Eds. (2019) Ascendants: Bauhaus Handprints Collected by László Moholy-Nagy. IIT Institute of Design, Chicago. Tierney, Sherry Jean (2008) Rezoning Chicago’s Modernisms: Ludwig Mies Van der Rohe, Rem Koolhaas, the IIT Campus and Its Bronzeville Prehistory (1914–2003). Master’s thesis, Department of Anthropology, Arizona State University, Tucson. Tolmie, Claire, and Paula Porubcan Branster (2018) Section 106 Archaeological Properties Identification Report Obama Presidential Center (OPC) Mobility Improvements to Support the South Lakefront Framework Plan (SLFP), Cook County, Illinois. Technical Report No. 184. Illinois State Archaeological Survey, Prairie Research Institute, University of Illinois at Urbana– Champaign. Electronic document, https://www.chicago.gov/content/dam/city/depts /dcd/supp_info/jackson/2018-03-19-Arch-Report.pdf, accessed June 23, 2022. Wade, Louise Carroll (2005) Philip Armour and the Packing Industry. Electronic Encyclopedia of Chicago. Electronic document, http://www.encyclopedia.chicagohstory.org/pages/1724 .html, accessed June 22, 2023. Williams, Alanna (2021) Archeologists Dug Up MOCAD Site: Here’s What They Found. Detroit Free Press 18 November. Electronic document, https://www.freep.com/story/news/local /michigan/detroit/2021/11/18/mocad-excavation-2021-what-they-found/8630309002/, accessed March 14, 2024. MCJA 49_2 Graff_Martino.indd 20 4/3/24 8:49 AM