Urbanism as a phenomenon of human culture has been a popular theme for research in many academic disciplines, including architecture, anthropology, archaeology, sociology, and geography. Near Eastern and European case studies served as the ultimate definition of urbanism well into the 1980s and inspired the compilation of several “trait lists,” which were used to classify precolonial settlements in the rest of the world. However, as a consequence of this tendency which dominated academic research, many cultural traditions recognized as urban today and multiple forms of built environment were for a long time denied their urban status. This is especially the case of precolonial towns and cities of the Global South, which importance was downplayed and misinterpreted, also for political reasons, in the colonial and early postcolonial era. This article reverses the traditional approach and in terms of regional works, it focuses specifically on the precolonial urban traditions that may be found in the Americas, Africa, and South and East Asia, while the traditions of Europe, Egypt, and the Near East are mentioned only for comparison. The geographical areas discussed here have been most intensively studied by archaeologists, who collect and analyze the material evidence with the ever-increasing use of interdisciplinary approaches. Today, this research highlights the global variety of cultural heritage, human experience, as well as the multitude of unique forms and structures of cities that flourished outside of and/or preceded modern European colonial influence. A range of theoretical stances and methodological approaches have been developed that strive to uncover the unique aspects of urbanisms that developed independently of the era of modern European colonialism, such as social organization, economics, architectural styles, cultural traditions or sensory perception. There have also been developments in the field of comparative approaches that highlight and reflect on the underlying aspects of urbanism. On their basis, we could arrive at understanding the built environment as representation of social configurations and traditions.