CACrown ArchivesThe cinema collection
Menu
Research dossier · Places & Architecture

Butte–Anaconda Historic District

historic district in Montana, United States

Architectural plans, a scale model, maps and brass measuring instruments
Places and architectureInterpretive dossier study · Crown Archives visual atlas
Record originEnglish Wikipedia
Text licenseCC BY-SA 4.0
Source revisionSep 2, 2026
Entity authorityQ5002785
Source-derived summary

The Butte–Anaconda Historic District is a National Historic Landmark (NHL) that spans parts of Walkerville, Butte and Anaconda, Montana, United States. It has the most resources of any U.S. National Historic Landmark District.

It was declared an NHL in 1961, when it focused only on Butte.

In 2006, the district was expanded significantly to include parts of Walkerville and Anaconda, as well as the bed of the Butte, Anaconda and Pacific Railroad. The expanded district covers 9,774 acres (39 km2) with nearly 6,000 contributing properties of historic significance.

New York's Adirondack Park and Alaska's Cape Krusenstern Archeological District are much larger by area, but may contain fewer contributing elements.

Significance

The district's national significance relates to its long history of copper production as well as to its role in the development of the labor union movement in the United States. As the source of nearly one-third of all the world's copper in the early 1900s, Butte's mines provided one of the metals that were critical to American industrialization.

Walkerville represents some of the earliest mines in the district and preserves the early mining camp flavor present in the 1890s to 1910s. Butte itself is an urban metropolis where industrial relics such as mine yards and head frames are juxtaposed with a wide variety of residential and business structures.

Editorial summary

“Butte–Anaconda Historic District” enters the record as historic district in Montana, United States. Crown Archives preserves that source wording while asking what Butte, Anaconda and Historic can confirm, complicate or overturn.

Editorial reviewA strong orientation record where physical form, institutional use and historical geography need to be read together. The current lead gives the account dated anchors—1961, 2006—that can be checked directly. The linked authority record independently contributes the date 1864. Its strongest next move is a source search built around Butte, Anaconda and Historic.
Editorial analysis

Why this record matters

“Butte–Anaconda Historic District” is worth following because a concise public description often conceals a longer documentary argument. Here, Butte, Anaconda and Historic provides the most credible route into that argument.

Evidence profile

Place names and jurisdictional language are key evidence: both can reveal earlier catalogue descriptions and overlooked record series. The source revision retrieved here is dated Sep 2, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q5002785. Authority coordinates are 46.000, -112.600. 2 of 2 selected statements include explicit references; 0 carry qualifiers and 0 use preferred rank. The first chronological checks are 1961 and 2006.

Critical limits

Modern boundaries and familiar names can conceal earlier jurisdictions or structures that do not align with the present site. The source lead contains qualifying language; that uncertainty should survive quotation, summary and reuse. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.

How to read it

Treat names, boundaries and functions as historically changeable. Maps, plans, inventories and administrative records can clarify what the place meant at different dates.

Best used for
  • Historic place names
  • Jurisdictional context
  • Routes into maps and plans
Verify next

Contemporary maps, plans, listed-building records, estate papers and the responsible local or national archive.

Three-step research path

  1. Establish the record: confirm the title “Butte–Anaconda Historic District”, its source revision and the description used here.
  2. Expand the search: follow Butte–Anaconda Historic District primary sources, Butte–Anaconda Historic District archive and Butte research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
  3. Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.

Questions for further research

  1. Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Butte–Anaconda Historic District”?
  2. What physical evidence or contemporary plan supports the description?
  3. Which earlier names or jurisdictions may reveal additional records?
Subject index

Search terms from this dossier

Source & attribution

This entry incorporates text from Butte–Anaconda Historic District” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.