CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 39Historical and Cultural Archaeology StudiesGender and Feminist StudiesHistorical Gender and Feminism Studies

Engendered and Feminist Archaeologies of the Recent and Documented Pasts

Wilkie, Laurie A., Hayes, Katherine Howlett·2006·Journal of Archaeological Research
DOI 10.1007/s10814-006-9005-4
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Engendered and feminist archaeologies in historical archaeology have developed in complementary ways to those in nonhistorical archaeologies but with distinct methodological issues and sources of data. This article discusses the development of engendered and feminist archaeologies that use textual sources, the continuing themes that characterize this body of work, and the state of the field today. The article concludes with a discussion of future directions for practitioners to pursue.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s10814-006-9005-4

Cites

210 of 210 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 65

  1. Battle, W. (2004). A space of our own: Redefining the enslaved household at Andrew Jackson's Hermitage Plantation. In Barile, K. S., and Brandon, J. C. (eds.), Household Chores and Household Choices: Theorizing the Domestic Sphere in Historical Archaeology, University of Alabama Press, Tuscaloosa, pp. 33–50.
  2. Beaudry, M. C. (1984). Archaeology and the historical household. Man in the Northeast 28: 27–38.
  3. Beaudry, M. C. (2004). Doing the housework: New approaches to the archaeology of households. In Barile, K. S., and Brandon, J. C. (eds.), Household Chores and Household Choices: Theorizing the Domestic Sphere in Historical Archaeology, University of Alabama Press, Tuscaloosa, pp. 254–262.
  4. Bonine, M. (2004). Analysis of household and family at a Spanish colonial rancho along the Rio Grande. In Barile, K. S., and Brandon, J. C. (eds.), Household Chores and Household Choices: Theorizing the Domestic Sphere in Historical Archaeology, University of Alabama Press, Tuscaloosa, pp. 15–32.
  5. Brandon, J., and Barile, K. (2004). Introduction: Household chores; or, the chore of defining the household. In Barile, K. S., and Brandon, J. C. (eds.), Household Chores and Household Choices: Theorizing the Domestic Sphere in Historical Archaeology, University of Alabama Press, Tuscaloosa, pp. 1–14.
  6. Buchli, V., and Lucas, G. (2000). Children, gender and the material culture of abandonment in the late twentieth century. In Sofaer Derevenski, J. (ed.), Children and Material Culture, Routledge, London, pp. 131–138.
  7. Clark, B. J. (2003). On the Edge of Purgatory: An Archaeology of Ethnicity and Gender in Hispanic Colorado. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of California, Berkeley.
  8. Connell, R. W. (1995). Masculinities, University of California Press, Berkeley.
  9. Connell, R. W. (2000). The Men and the Boys, University of California Press, Berkeley.
  10. Galle, J. E., and Young, A. L. (eds.) (2004). Engendering African American Archaeology: A Southern Perspective, University of Tennessee Press, Knoxville.
  11. Hodder, I. (1997) Commentary: The gender screen. In Moore, J., and Scott, E. (eds.), Invisible People and Processes: Writing Gender and Childhood into European Archaeology, Leicester University Press, London, pp. 75–78.
  12. Howlett, K. (2004). Gendered practice: Ethnohistoric and archaeological evidence of Native American social divisions of labor. Bulletin of the Archaeological Society of Connecticut 66: 65–84.
  13. Jamieson, R. W. (2000). Dona Luisa and her two houses. In Delle, J. A., Mrozowski, S. A., and Paynter, R. (eds.), Lines That Divide: Historical Archaeologies of Race, Class, and Gender, University of Tennessee Press, Knoxville, pp. 142–167.
  14. Joyce, R. A. (2002b). Beauty, sexuality, body ornamentation, and gender in ancient Mesoamerica. In Nelson, S. M., and Rosen–Ayalon, M. (eds.), In Pursuit of Gender: Worldwide Archaeological Approaches, AltaMira Press, Walnut Creek, CA, pp. 81–91.
  15. Kennedy, M. (1989). Houses with red lights: The nature of female households in the sporting subculture community. In MacEachern, S., Archer, D. J. W., and Garvin, R. D. (eds.), Households and Communities: Proceedings of the 21st Annual Chacmool Conference, University of Calgary Archaeological Association, Calgary, pp. 93–100.
  16. Linduff, K. M. (2002). Women's lives memorialized in burial in ancient China at Anyang. In Nelson, S. M., and Rosen–Ayalon, M. (eds.), In Pursuit of Gender: Worldwide Archaeological Approaches, AltaMira Press, Walnut Creek, CA, pp. 257–287.
  17. Moore, J., and Scott, E. (eds.) (1997). Invisible People and Processes: Writing Gender and Childhood into European Archaeology, Leicester University Press, London.
  18. Mrozowski, S. A. (1984). Prospects and perspectives on an archaeology of the household. Man in the Northeast 27: 31–49.
  19. Mullins, P. R. (2001). Racializing the parlor: Race and Victorian bric-a-brac consumption. In Orser, C. E. Jr., (ed.), Race and the Archaeology of Identity, University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City, pp. 158–176.
  20. Nelson, M., Glowacki, D., and Smith, A. (2002). The impact of women on household economies: A Maya case study. In Nelson, S. M., and Rosen–Ayalon, M. (eds.), In Pursuit of Gender: Worldwide Archaeological Approaches, AltaMira Press, Walnut Creek, CA, pp. 125–154.
  21. Pappas, E. I. (2004). Fictive kin in the mountains: The paternalistic metaphor and households in a California logging camp. In Barile, K. S., and Brandon, J. C. (eds.), Household Chores and Household Choices: Theorizing the Domestic Sphere in Historical Archaeology, University of Alabama Press, Tuscaloosa, pp. 159–176.
  22. Praetzellis, A., and Praetzellis, M. (eds.) (1998). Archaeologists as storytellers. Special issue of Historical Archaeology 32(1): 1–96.
  23. Prine, E. (2000). Searching for third genders: Towards a prehistory of domestic space in middle Missouri villages. In Schmidt, R., and Voss, B. (eds.), Archaeologies of Sexuality, Routledge, London, pp. 197–219.
  24. Rosen–Ayalon, M. (2002). The female figure in Umayyad art. In Nelson, S. M., and Rosen–Ayalon, M. (eds.), In Pursuit of Gender: Worldwide Archaeological Approaches, AltaMira Press, Walnut Creek, CA, pp. 289–306.
  25. Schmidt, R., and Voss, B. (eds.) (2000). Archaeologies of Sexuality, Routledge, London.
  26. Scott, E. M. (1994). Through the lens of gender: Archaeology, inequality, and those “of little note.” In Scott, E. M. (ed.), Those of Little Note: Gender, Race, and Class in Historical Archaeology, University of Arizona Press, Tucson, pp. 3–24.
  27. Scott, E. M. (2004). Introduction: Gender research in African American archaeology. In Galle, J., and Young, A. (eds.), Engendering African American Archaeology: A Southern Perspective, University of Tennessee Press, Knoxville, pp. 1–18.
  28. Seifert, D. J., O’Brien, E. B., and Balicki, J. (2000). Mary Ann Hall's first class brothel: The archaeology of a capital brothel. In Schmidt, R. A., and Voss, B. L. (eds.), Archaeologies of Sexuality, Routledge, London, pp. 117–128.
  29. Sofaer–Derevenski, J. (ed.) (2000). Children and Material Culture, Routledge, London.
  30. Spector, J. D. (1991). What this awl means: Toward a feminist archaeology. In Gero, J. M., and Conkey, M. W. (eds.), Engendering Archaeology: Women and Prehistory, Blackwell, Oxford, pp. 388–406.
  31. Spencer–Wood, S. M. (1994). Diversity and nineteenth-century domestic reform: Relationships among classes and ethnic groups. In Scott, E. M. (ed.), Those of Little Note: Gender, Race, and Class in Historical Archaeology, University of Arizona Press, Tucson, pp. 175–208.
  32. Spencer–Wood, S. M. (2003). Gendering the creation of green urban landscapes in America at the turn of the century. In Rotman, D. L., and Savulis, E. R. (eds.), Shared Spaces and Divided Places: Material Dimensions of Gender Relations and the American Historical Landscape, University of Tennessee Press, Knoxville, pp. 24–61.
  33. Spencer–Wood, S. M. (2004). A historic pay-for-housework community household: The Cambridge cooperative housekeeping society. In Barile, K. S., and Brandon, J. C. (eds.), Household Chores and Household Choices: Theorizing the Domestic Sphere in Historical Archaeology, University of Alabama Press, Tuscaloosa, pp. 138–158.
  34. Strathern, M. (1992). Reproducing the Future, Routledge, New York.
  35. Victor, K., and Beaudry, M. (1992). Women's participation in American prehistoric and historic archaeology: A comparative look at the journals American Antiquity and Historical Archaeology. In Claassen, C. (ed.), Exploring Gender through Archaeology, Prehistory Press, Madison, WI, pp. 11–22.
  36. Voss, B. L. (2000b). Colonial sex: Archaeology, structured space, and sexuality in Alta California's Spanish-colonial missions. In Schmidt, R. A., and Voss, B. L. (eds.), Archaeologies of Sexuality, Routledge, London, pp. 35–61.
  37. Walde, D., and Willows, N. D. (eds.) (1991). The Archaeology of Gender: Proceedings of the Twenty-Second Annual Conference of the Archaeological Society of Calgary, University of Calgary, Calgary.
  38. Whitehouse, R. D. (2002). Gender in the southern Italian Neolithic: A combinatory approach. In Nelson, S. M., and Rosen–Ayalon, M. (eds.), In Pursuit of Gender: Worldwide Archaeological Approaches, AltaMira Press, Walnut Creek, CA, pp. 15–42.
  39. Wilkie, L. A. (1998). The other gender: The archaeology of an early 20th century fraternity. Proceedings of the Society for California Archaeology 11: 7–11.
  40. Wilkie, L. A. (2000a). Creating Freedom: African-American Constructions of Identity at a Louisiana Plantation, 1845–1950, Louisiana State University Press, Baton Rouge.
  41. Wilkie, L. A. (2000b). Magical passions: Sexuality and African-American archaeology. In Schmidt, R. A., and Voss, B. L. (eds.), Archaeologies of Sexuality, Routledge, London, pp. 129–142.
  42. Wilson, K. J., and Cabak, M. (2004). Feminine voices from beyond the grave: What burials can tell us about gender differences among historic African Americans. In Galle, J., and Young, A. (eds.), Engendering African American Archaeology: A Southern Perspective, University of Tennessee Press, Knoxville, pp. 263–286.
  43. Wood, M. C. (2004). Working-class households as sites of social change. In Barile, K. S., and Brandon, J. C. (eds.), Household Chores and Household Choices: Theorizing the Domestic Sphere in Historical Archaeology, University of Alabama Press, Tuscaloosa, pp. 210–232.
  44. Wurst, L. A. (2003). The legacy of separate spheres. In Rotman, D. L., and Savulis, E. R. (eds.), Shared Spaces and Divided Places: Material Dimensions of Gender Relations and the American Historical Landscape, University of Tennessee Press, Knoxville, pp. 225–238.
  45. Zeising, G. H. (1991). Personal effects from the backlots of Boott Mills corporate housing in Lowell, Massachusetts: A gender study in historical archaeology, Unpublished M.A. thesis, Department of Anthropology, Boston University, Boston.
  46. Arnold, B. (2002). “Sein und Werden”: Gender as process in mortuary ritual. In Nelson, S. M., and Rosen–Ayalon, M. (eds.), In Pursuit of Gender: Worldwide Archaeological Approaches, AltaMira Press, Walnut Creek, CA, pp. 239–256.
  47. Bacus, E. A. (2002). Accessing prestige and power: Women in the political economy of protohistoric and early historic Visayan polities. In Nelson, S. M., and Rosen–Ayalon, M. (eds.), In Pursuit of Gender: Worldwide Archaeological Approaches, AltaMira Press, Walnut Creek, CA, pp. 307–322.
  48. Bassett, E. (1994). “We took care of each other like families were meant to”: Gender, social organization, and wage labor among the Apache at Roosevelt. In Scott, E. M. (ed.), Those of Little Note: Gender, Race, and Class in Historical Archaeology, University of Arizona Press, Tucson, pp. 55–79.
  49. Beaudry, M. C. (1989). Household structure and the archaeological record: Examples from New World historical sites. In MacEachern, S., Archer, D. J. W., and Garvin, R. D. (eds.), Households and Communities: Proceedings of the 21st Annual Chacmool Conference, University of Calgary Archaeological Association, Calgary, pp. 84–92.
  50. Delle, J. A., Mrozowski, S. A., and Paynter, R. (eds.) (2000). Lines That Divide: Historical Archaeologies of Race, Class, and Gender, University of Tennessee Press, Knoxville.
  51. du Cros, H., and Smith, L. (eds.) (1993). Women in Archaeology: A Feminist Critique, RSPAS, Australian National University, Canberra.
  52. Franklin, M. (2001). The archaeological dimensions of soul food: Interpreting race, culture, and Afro-Virginian identity. In Orser, C. E. (ed.), Race and the Archaeology of Identity, University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City, pp. 88–107.
  53. Goldberg, M. Y. (1999). Spatial and behavioral negotiation in classical Athenian city houses. In Allison, P. M. (ed.), The Archaeology of Household Activities, Routledge, London, pp. 142–161.
  54. Lawrence, S., and Karskens, G. (eds.) (2003). Recent Work in Historical Archaeology in Australia and New Zealand. Special issue of Historical Archaeology 37(1): 1–158.
  55. Lydon, J. (1995). Gender in Australian historical archaeology. In Balme, J., and Beck, W. (eds.), Gendered Archaeology: The Second Australian Women in Archaeology Conference, ANH Publications, RSPAS, Australian National University, Canberra, pp. 72–79.
  56. Orser, C. E. Jr., (ed.) (2001). Race and the Archaeology of Identity, University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City.
  57. Praetzellis, A., and Praetzellis, M. (1992). Faces and facades: Victorian ideology in early Sacramento. In Yentsch, A. E., and Beaudry, M. C. (eds.), The Art and Mystery of Historical Archaeology: Essays in Honor of James Deetz, CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, pp. 75–99.
  58. Rotman, D. L., and Savulis, E. R. (eds.) (2003). Shared Spaces and Divided Places: Material Dimensions of Gender Relations and the American Historical Landscape, University of Tennessee Press, Knoxville.
  59. Seifert, D. J. (1994). Mrs. Starr's profession. In Scott, E. M. (ed.), Those of Little Note: Gender, Race, and Class in Historical Archaeology, University of Arizona Press, Tucson, pp. 149–173.
  60. Thomas, L. A. (2000). Images of women in Native American iconography. In Nassaney, M. S., and Johnson, E. S. (eds.), Interpretations of Native North American Life: Material Contributions to Ethnohistory, University Press of Florida, Gainesville, pp. 321–357.
  61. Trocolli, R. (1992) Colonization and women's production: The Timucua of Florida. In C. Claassen (ed.), Exploring Gender through Archaeology, Prehistory Press, Madison, WI, pp. 95–102.
  62. Wilkie, L. A. (1994). Childhood in the Quarters: Playtime at Oakley and Riverlake Plantations. Louisiana Folklife 18: 13–20.
  63. Wilkie, L. A. (1996). Medicinal teas and patent medicines: African-American women's consumer choices and ethnomedical traditions at a Louisiana plantation. Southeastern Archaeology 15: 119–131.
  64. Wilkie, L. A. (2004). African-American midwives: Gender and generational ediators. In Galle, J. E., and Young, A. L. (eds.), Engendering African American Archaeology: A Southern Perspective, University of Tennessee Press, Knoxville, pp. 73–100.
  65. Yentsch, A. (1991). The symbolic divisions of pottery: Sex-related attributes of English and Anglo-American household pots. In McGuire, R., and Paynter, R. (eds.), The Archaeology of Inequality, Basil Blackwell, Oxford, pp. 192–230.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Wilkie, L. A., & Hayes, K. H.
Affiliations
University of California System (US)
Corresponding author
Wilkie, Laurie A.
Venue
Journal of Archaeological Research
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2006-09-21
Volume
14
Issue
3
Pages
243-264
ISSN
  • 1059-0161 (ISSN-L)
  • 1573-7756
DOI
10.1007/s10814-006-9005-4
OpenAlex
W1985574255
Cited by
39
References
210
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 1 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 2 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 3
FWCI
5.99
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
www.springer.com/tdm (tdm)
Locations
Journal of Archaeological Research (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Anthropology › Historical and Cultural Archaeology Studies
  • Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Gender and Feminist Studies
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Historical Gender and Feminism Studies
Keywords
feminist archaeology, historical archaeology, textual sources, gender archaeology, methodological issues

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review