Encyclopedia of Global Archaeology

2014 Edition
| Editors: Claire Smith

Engendering Historical Archaeology

  • Deb Rotman
Reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-0465-2_1363


To say that gendered social relations are complex would be to profoundly understate the dynamism of the human experience (Rotman 2009). The ways in which individuals understand their roles as gendered beings and their relationships to other gendered beings is constantly pushed and pulled by forces both internal and external to the individual and the family/social/economic unit to which they belong at multiple scales from the household to the community to the nation. Identity, sexuality, cultural prescriptions for social roles, socioeconomic class, ethnic heritage, life cycle, and other dimensions of the cultural world create tensions between societal structures, gender ideals, and individual choices that require continual negotiation, interpretation, and implementation.

Although challenging for scholars who seek to understand these social relations, these complexities are precisely why gender is an endlessly fascinating subject for study. Through time and across space, the...

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.


  1. Battle-Baptiste, W. 2011. Black feminist archaeology. Walnut Creek (CA): Left Coast Press.Google Scholar
  2. Davies, S.G. 2007. Challenging gender norms: five genders among the Bugis in Indonesia (Case Studies in Anthropology). Belmont (CA): Thomson Wadsworth.Google Scholar
  3. Fausto-Sterling, A. 2000. Sexing the body: gender politics and the construction of sexuality. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  4. Gellar, P. 2009. Identity and difference: complicating gender in archaeology. Annual Review of Anthropology 38: 65-81.Google Scholar
  5. Gero, J.M. & M.W. Conkey. 1991. Engendering archaeology: women and prehistory. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
  6. McGuire, R. 1988. Dialogues with the dead: ideology and the cemetery, in M.P. Leone & P.B. Potter Jr. (ed.) The recovery of meaning: historical archaeology in the eastern United States: 435-80. Washington (DC): Smithsonian Institution Press.Google Scholar
  7. Mullins, P. 1999. Race and affluence: an archaeology of African American and consumer culture. New York: Kluwer Academic Press.Google Scholar
  8. - 2011. The archaeology of consumer culture, in M.S. Nassaney (ed.) Contributions to the American experience in archaeological perspective. Tallahassee: University of Florida Press.Google Scholar
  9. Nassaney, M. 2004. Native American gender politics and material culture in seventeenth-century southeastern New England. Journal of Social Archaeology 4: 334-67.Google Scholar
  10. Rotman, D.L. 2009. Historical archaeology of gendered lives (Contributions to Global Historical Archaeology). New York: Springer Academic Publishing.Google Scholar
  11. Shackel, P. 1996. Culture change and the new technology: an archaeology of an early American industrial era (Contributions to Global Historical Archaeology). New York; London: Plenum Press.Google Scholar
  12. Spencer-Wood, S. 2012. Commentary: how feminist theory increases our understanding of the archaeology of poverty. Historical Archaeology 45: 183-93.Google Scholar
  13. Voss, B. 2008. The archaeology of ethnogenesis: race and sexuality in colonial San Francisco. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  14. Wall, D. 1991. Sacred dinners and secular teas: constructing domesticity in mid-nineteenth-century New York. Historical Archaeology 25: 69-81.Google Scholar
  15. - 2000. Family meals and evening parties: constructing domesticity in nineteenth-century middle-class New York, in J.A. Delle, S.A. Mrozowski & R. Paynter (ed.) Lines that divide: historical archaeologies of race, class, and gender: 109-41. Knoxville: University of Tennessee Press.Google Scholar
  16. Wilkie, L. 2003. The archaeology of mothering: an African-American midwife’s tale. New York; London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  17. Wurst, L. 2003. The legacy of separate spheres, in D.L. Rotman & E.R. Savulis (ed.) Shared spaces and divided places: material dimensions of gender relations and the American historical landscape: 225-37. Knoxville: University of Tennessee Press.Google Scholar

Further Reading

  1. Andersson, J., M. Elfwendahl, G. Gustafson, B. Hägerman, R. Lundqvist, U. Stenbäck Lönquist, J. Ulfsdotter & S. Welinder. 2011. Visible men and elusive women. Journal of International Historical Archaeology 15: 10-29.Google Scholar
  2. Barile, K.S. & J.C. Brandon. 2004. Household chores and household choices: theorizing the domestic sphere in historical archaeology. Tuscaloosa: University of Alabama Press.Google Scholar
  3. Contributions to a Global Historical Archaeology. n.d. Available at: http://www.springer.com/series/5734.
  4. Delle, J., S. Mrozowski & R. Painter. (ed.) 2000. Lines that divide: historical archaeologies of race, class, and gender. Knoxville: University of Tennessee Press.Google Scholar
  5. Galle, J.E. & A. Young. (ed.) 2004. Engendering African American archaeology: a southern perspective. Knoxville: University of Tennessee Press.Google Scholar
  6. Greenwood, R.S. & D.N. Slawson. 2008. Gathering insights on isolation. Historical Archaeology 42: 68-79.Google Scholar
  7. Hall, M. & S.W. Silliman. (ed.) 2006. Historical archaeology (Blackwell Studies in Global Archaeology). Malden (MA); Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.Google Scholar
  8. Hicks, D. & M. Beaudry. (ed.) 2006. The Cambridge companion to historical archaeology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  9. Historical Archaeology. n.d. Available at: http://www.sha.org/publications/SHA_volume_indices/indices.cfm.
  10. International Journal of Historical Archaeology. n.d. Available at: http://www.springer.com/social+sciences/anthropology+%26+archaeology/journal/10761.
  11. Middleton, A. 2007. Silent voice, hidden lives: archaeology, class, and gender in the CMS missions, Bay of Islands, New Zealand, 1814-1845. International Journal of Historical Archaeology 11: 1-31.Google Scholar
  12. Nassaney, M.S., D.L. Rotman, D. Sayers & C. Nickolai. 2001. The southwest Michigan historical landscape project: exploring class, gender, and ethnicity from the ground up. International Journal of Historical Archaeology 5: 219-61.Google Scholar
  13. Nelson, S.M. (ed.) 2007. Women in antiquity: theoretical approaches to gender and archaeology. Lanham (MD): AltaMira Press.Google Scholar
  14. Nickolai, C. 2003. The relevance of nineteenth-century religion to the archaeological record: an example from the home of Ellen White, Prophetess of Seventh-Day Adventism. International Journal of Historical Archaeology 7: 145-59.Google Scholar
  15. Pearson, M. & P.R. Mullins. 1999. Domesticating Barbie: an archaeology of Barbie material culture and domestic ideology. International Journal of Historical Archaeology 3: 225-59.Google Scholar
  16. Rothschild, N.A. 2006. Colonialism, material culture, and identity in the Rio Grande and Hudson River Valleys. International Journal of Historical Archaeology 10: 73-108.Google Scholar
  17. Rotman, D.L. 2006. Separate spheres? Beyond the dichotomies of domesticity. Current Anthropology 47: 666-74.Google Scholar
  18. Rotman, D.L. & E.R. Savulis. (ed.) 2003. Shared spaces and divided places: exploring the material and spatial dimensions of gender relations and American historical landscapes. Knoxville: University of Tennessee Press.Google Scholar
  19. Spencer-Wood, S. 2006. A feminist theoretical approach to the historical archaeology of utopian communities. Historical Archaeology 40: 152-85.Google Scholar
  20. Spude, C.H. 2005. Brothels and saloons: an archaeology of gender in the American West. Historical Archaeology 39: 89-106.Google Scholar
  21. The American Experience in Archaeological Perspective. n.d. Available at: http://www.upf.com/seriesresult.asp?ser=aearch.

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Anthropology, Center for Undergraduate Scholarly Engagement (CUSE)University of Notre DameNotre DameUSA