Skip to main content Accessibility help

Introduction: governmentality, house numbering and the spatial history of the modern city



This special section of Urban History explores the spatial histories of urban house numbering and the calculative rationalities of government since the Enlightenment. More than a mere footnote to the history of postal communications, the house number was first introduced as an inscriptive device to serve a wide range of governmental purposes, from military conscription and the quartering of soldiers to census-taking and the policing of urban populations. The spatial practice of house numbering can therefore be seen as a ‘political technology’ that was developed to reorganize urban space according to the dictates of numerical calculation. The articles in this special section examine the historical emergence of house numbering, and related practices, in different geographical circumstances, illustrating the spatial strategies of governmentality and the tactics of resistance that shaped the spatial organization of the modern city.



Hide All

1 Foucault, M., Security, Territory, Population, Lectures at the Collège de France, 1977–1978 (New York, 2007), 109.

2 Garrioch, D., ‘House names, shop signs and social organization in Western European cities, 1500–1900’, Urban History, 21 (1994), 2048; Joyce, P., ‘Maps, numbers and the city: knowing the governed’, in Joyce, P., The Rule of Freedom: Liberalism and the Modern City (London, 2003), 2061; Tantner, A., Ordnung der Häuser, Beschreibung der Seelen: Hausnummerierung und Seelenkonskription in der Habsburgermonarchie (Innsbruck, 2007); Tantner, A., ‘Addressing the houses: the introduction of house numbering in Europe’, Histoire & Mesure, 24 (2009), 730; Rose-Redwood, R., ‘Indexing the great ledger of the community: urban house numbering, city directories, and the production of spatial legibility’, Journal of Historical Geography, 34 (2008), 286310. To supplement this scholarship, one of the current authors has created a ‘Gallery of House Numbers’ as an online resource that documents the history of house-numbering practices in different cities (see For a more general discussion of state power and the production of legible spaces, see Scott, J., Seeing Like a State: How Certain Schemes to Improve the Human Condition Have Failed (New Haven, 1998).

3 Tantner, ‘Addressing the houses’.

4 For a discussion of the notion of ‘political technology’ in relation to modern governmentality, see Foucault, M., ‘The political technology of individuals’, in Martin, L., Gutman, H. and Hutton, P. (eds.), Technologies of the Self: A Seminar with Michel Foucault (Amherst, 1988), 145–62; Foucault, Security, Territory, Population; also, see Dreyfus, H. and Rabinow, P., Michel Foucault: Beyond Structuralism and Hermeneutics (Chicago, 1983); Dean, M., Governmentality: Power and Rule in Modern Society (London, 1999); Bröckling, U., Krasman, S. and Lemke, T. (eds.), Governmentality: Current Issues and Future Challenges (New York, 2011).

5 Guillaute, M., Mémoire sur la reformation de la police en France: soumis au roi en 1749, ed. Seznec, J. (Paris, 1974).

6 Paris was originally exempt from this royal decree because soldiers lived in barracks rather than among the populace at large. Pronteau, J., Les numérotages des maisons de Paris du XVe siècle a nos jours (Paris, 1966).

7 Tantner, Ordnung der Häuser, Beschreibung der Seelen.

8 Trow's New York City Directory (New York, 1878), vii.

9 Rose-Redwood, ‘Indexing the great ledger of the community’.

10 Foucault, M., ‘Governmentality’, in Gordon, C. and Miller, P. (eds.), The Foucault Effect: Studies in Governmentality (Chicago, 1991), 102.

11 For a discussion of what Foucault calls the ‘urbanization of the territory’, which refers to the way in which calculative techniques of socio-spatial ordering historically emerged in the city and later provided a model for ‘arranging things so that the territory is organized like a town’, see Foucault, Security, Territory, Population, 336. Also, an insightful analysis of the political technologies of territory is provided in Hannah, M., ‘Calculable territory and the West German census boycott movements of the 1980s’, Political Geography, 28 (2009), 6675; Elden, S., ‘Land, terrain, territory’, Progress in Human Geography, 34 (2010), 799817; Crampton, J., ‘Cartographic calculations of territory’, Progress in Human Geography, 35 (2011), 92103; Rose-Redwood, R., ‘With numbers in place: security, territory, and the production of calculable space’, Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 102 (2012), 295319.

12 For a discussion of the household as a spatial unit of government in US legal history, see Shammas, C., A History of Household Government in America (Charlottesville, 2002). There is also a growing body of scholarship on the ‘home’ as a significant spatial category of social life; a concise overview of this research area can be found in Blunt, A. and Dowling, R., Home (New York, 2006). Although such works provide considerable insights into the social production of ‘home’ as part of a broader set of place-making practices, the role of house numbering as a means of rendering the space of the home ‘legible’, and thereby amenable to governmental intervention, remains largely unexplored within this body of literature. Although Foucault does not provide a detailed genealogy of house numbering per se, his account of ‘the problem of the series’ highlights the mechanisms through which the ‘indefinite series’ of mobile and static elements (such as carts and houses, respectively) have been monitored and regulated through political technologies of calculation since the eighteenth century. Foucault, Security, Territory, Population, 20. Additionally, Foucault explicitly mentions the way in which ‘individuals were made visible’ by localizing each to a house in Foucault, M., Society Must Be Defended: Lectures at the Collège de France, 1975–1976 (New York, 2003), 251.

13 The critical project of a ‘spatial history’ is elaborated in Elden, S., Mapping the Present: Heidegger, Foucault and the Project of a Spatial History (London, 2001); for a somewhat different conception of spatial history, see Carter, P., The Road to Botany: An Exploration of Landscape and History (Minneapolis, 2010).

14 Appadurai, A., ‘Number in the colonial imagination’, in Appadurai, A., Modernity at Large: Cultural Dimensions of Globalization (Minneapolis, 1996), 114–35.

15 Baldwin, L. and Grimaud, M., ‘Washington, Montana, the Dakotas – and Massachusetts: a comparative approach to street naming’, Names, 37 (1989), 115–38; Hamlin, F., ‘Numbers in placenames’, Names, 47 (1999), 233–42.

16 Farvacque-Vitkovic, C., Godin, L., Leroux, H., Verdet, F. and Chavez, R., Street Addressing and the Management of Cities (Washington, DC, 2005); Curry, M., Phillips, D. and Regan, P., ‘Emergency response systems and the creeping legibility of people and places’, The Information Society, 20 (2004), 357–69; Rose-Redwood, ‘With numbers in place’.

17 Elden, Mapping the Present, 3.

Related content

Powered by UNSILO

Introduction: governmentality, house numbering and the spatial history of the modern city



Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed.