International Journal of Historical Archaeology

, Volume 14, Issue 4, pp 498–526 | Cite as

A Feminist Framework for Analyzing Powered Cultural Landscapes in Historical Archaeology

Article

Abstract

“Powered cultural landscapes” is my term for landscapes that express social power dynamics. Historical archaeologists have not adopted or developed adequate definitions or theorizations of the terms “power” or “landscape.” Since these terms are predominantly considered separately in the literature, this article first briefly defines power and develops a heterarchical theory of power. Then cultural landscapes are defined and categories of human-landscape interactions are constructed. The bulk of the article applies my heterarchical paradigm to analyze the social power dynamics in selected examples of historical archaeological research concerned with each category of human-landscape interaction.

Keywords

Landscape Power Class Ethnicity Gender 

References

  1. Agnew, A. B. (1995). Women and property in early 19th century Portsmouth, New Hampshire. Historical Archaeology 29(1): 62–75.Google Scholar
  2. Barile, K. S. (2004). Hegemony within the household: The perspective from a South Carolina 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. 121–137.Google Scholar
  3. 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.Google Scholar
  4. Baugher, S. B. (2001). Visible charity: The archaeology, material culture, and landscape design of New York City’s Municipal Almshouse complex, 1736–1797. International Journal of Historical Archaeology 5: 175–202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Baugher, S. B., and Spencer-Wood, S. M. (eds.) (2010). The Archaeology and Preservation of Gendered Landscapes, Springer, New York.Google Scholar
  6. Baugher, S. (2010). Landscapes of Power: Middle Class and Lower Class Power Dynamics in a New York Charitable Institution. International Journal of Historical Archaeology. doi:10.1007/s10761-010-0120-z
  7. Beaudry, M. C., and Mrozowski, S. A. (2001). Cultural space and worker identity in the company city: Nineteenth-century Lowell, Massachusetts. In Mayne, A., and Murray, T. (eds.), The Archaeology of Urban Landscapes: Explorations in Slumland, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 118–132.Google Scholar
  8. Beaudry, M. C., Cook, L. J., and Mrozowski, S. A. (1991). Artifacts and active voices: material culture as social discourse. In McGuire, R. H., and Paynter, R. (eds.), The Archaeology of Inequality, Blackwell, Oxford, pp. 150–192.Google Scholar
  9. Benton, M. (1981). “Objective” interests and the sociology of power. Sociology 15: 161–184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bhabha, H. (1997). Of mimicry and man: The ambivalence of colonial discourses. In Stoler, A. L., and Cooper, F. (eds.), Tensions of Empire: Colonial Cultures in a Bourgeois World, University of California Press, Berkeley, pp. 152–198.Google Scholar
  11. Binford, L. (1983). Working at Archaeology, Academic, New York.Google Scholar
  12. Bourdieu, P. (1977). Outline of a Theory of Practice. Nice, R. (trans.) Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  13. Braudel, F. (1972). The Mediterranean and the Mediterranean World in the Age of Phillip II. Reynolds, S. (trans.), Harper and Row, New York.Google Scholar
  14. Casella, E. C. (2001). To watch or restrain: Female convict prisons in nineteenth-century Tasmania. International Journal of Historical Archaeology 5(1): 45–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Casella, E. C. (2007). The Archaeology of Institutional Confinement, University Press of Florida, Gainsville.Google Scholar
  16. Casella, E. C., and Fowler, C. (2005). Beyond identification: An introduction. In Casella, E. C., and Fowler, C. (eds.), The Archaeology of Plural and Changing Identities, Kluwer Academic/Plenum, New York, pp. 1–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Clisby, H. (n.d.). History of the WEIU. Women’s Educational and Industrial Union records, 1877-. Schlesinger Library of the History of Women in America, Radcliffe Institute, Harvard University, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  18. Cowgill, G. L. (2000). “Rationality” and contexts in agency theory. In Dobres, M., and Robb, J. E. (eds.), Agency in Archaeology, Routledge, London, pp. 51–61.Google Scholar
  19. Crumley, C. L. (1987). A dialectical critique of hierarchy. In Patterson, T. C., and Gailey, C. W. (eds.), Power Relations and State Formation, American Anthropological Association, Washington D.C., pp. 155–169.Google Scholar
  20. Dawdy, S. L. (2006). Proper caresses and prudent distance: A how-to manual from colonial Louisiana. In Stoler, A. L. (ed.), Haunted by Empire: Geographies of Intimacy in North American History, Duke University Press, Durham, pp. 140–163.Google Scholar
  21. De Cunzo, L. A. (1995). Reform, respite, ritual: An archaeology of institutions—The Magdalen Society of Philadelphia, 1800–1850. Historical Archaeology 29(3): 1–168.Google Scholar
  22. De Cunzo, L. A. (2001). On reforming the “fallen” and beyond: Transforming continuity at the Magdalen Society of Philadelphia, 1845–1916. International Journal of Historical Archaeology 5: 19–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. De Cunzo, L. A. (2004). A Historical Archaeology of Delaware: People, Contexts and the Cultures of Agriculture, University of Tennessee Press, Knoxville.Google Scholar
  24. De Cunzo, L. A. (2006). Exploring the institution: Reform, cofinement, social change. In Hall, M., and Silliman, S. W. (eds.), Historical Archaeology, Blackwell, Malden, MA, pp. 190–208.Google Scholar
  25. Deetz, J. F. (1988). Material culture and worldview in colonial Anglo-America. In Leone, M. P., and Potter Jr., P. B. (eds.), The Recovery of Meaning: Historical Archaeology in the Eastern United States, Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington D.C., pp. 219–235.Google Scholar
  26. Deetz, J. F. (1996). In Small Things Forgotten: The Archaeology of Early American Life, Anchor Books, New York.Google Scholar
  27. Delle, J. A. (1999a). “A good and easy speculation”: Spatial conflict, collusion, and resistance in late sixteenth-century Munster, Ireland. International Journal of Historical Archaeology 3: 11–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Delle, J. A. (1999b). The landscapes of class negotiation on coffee plantations in the Blue Mountains of Jamaica, 1790–1850. Historical Archaeology 33(1): 136–159.Google Scholar
  29. Febvre, L. (2000). A Geographical Introduction to History, Columbia University Press, New York.Google Scholar
  30. Fesler, G. R. (2004). Living arrangements among enslaved women and men at an early-eighteenth-century Virginia quartering site. In Galle, J. E., and Young, A. L. (eds.), Engendering African American Archaeology: A Southern Perspective, University of Tennessee Press, Knoxville, pp. 177–237.Google Scholar
  31. Foucault, M. (1978). The History of Sexuality. Volume I: Introduction. Hurley, R. (trans.) Pantheon, New York.Google Scholar
  32. Foucault, M. (1980). Power/Knowledge: Selected Interviews and Other Writings, 1972–1977. Gordon, C. (ed.). Pantheon, New York.Google Scholar
  33. Foucault, M. (1988). The ethic of care for the self as a practice of freedom: An interview. Gauthier, J. D. (trans.) In Bernauer, J., and Rasmussen, D. (eds.), The Final Foucault, MIT Press, Cambridge, pp. 1–21.Google Scholar
  34. Foucault, M. (1995). Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison. Sheridan, A. (trans.) Vintage, New York.Google Scholar
  35. Frazer, B. (1999). Reconceptualizing resistance in the historical archaeology of the British Isles: An editorial. International Journal of Historical Archaeology 3: 1–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Funari, P. P. A. (2003). Conflict and the interpretation of Palmares, a Brazilian runaway polity. Historical Archaeology 37(3): 81–92.Google Scholar
  37. Geier, C. R. (2003). Confederate fortification and troop deployment in a mountain landscape: Fort Edward Johnson and Camp Sheannandoah, April 1862. Historical Archaeology 37(3): 31–46.Google Scholar
  38. Hall, M. (2000). Archaeology and the Modern World: Colonial transcripts in South Africa and the Chesapeake, Routledge, London.Google Scholar
  39. Hardesty, D. L. (1994). Class, gender strategies, and material culture in the mining West. In Scott, E. M. (ed.), Those of Little Note: Gender, Race, and Class in Historical Archaeology, University of Arizona Press, Tucson, pp. 129–149.Google Scholar
  40. Hardesty, D. L. (1998). Power and the industrial mining community in the American West. In Knapp, A. B., Pigott, V. C., and Herbert, E. W. (eds.), Social Approaches to an Industrial Past: The Anthropology and Archaeology of Mining, Routledge, London.Google Scholar
  41. Heberling, P. M. (1987). Status indicators: Another strategy for interpretation of settlement pattern in a nineteenth-century industrial village. In Spencer-Wood, S. M. (ed.), Consumer Choice in Historical Archaeology, Plenum Press, New York, pp. 199–217.Google Scholar
  42. Henretta, J. A. (1991). The Origins of American Capitalism: Collected Essays, Northeastern University Press, Boston.Google Scholar
  43. Hodder, I., and Hutson, S. (2003). Reading the Past: Current Approaches to Interpretation in Archaeology, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  44. Hooks, B. (1984). Feminist Theory: From Margin to Center, South End Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  45. Huataniemi, S. I., and Rotman, D. L. (2004). To the hogs or to the house? Municipal water and gender relations at the Moors Site in Deerfield, Massachusetts. In Rotman, D. L., and Savulis, E. (eds.), Shared Spaces and Divided Places: Material Dimensions of Gender Relations and the American Historical Landscape, University of Tennessee Press, Knoxville, pp. 135–159.Google Scholar
  46. Insoll, T. (2005). Changing identities in the Arabian Gulf: Archaeology, religion and ethnicity in context. In Casella, E. C., and Fowler, C. (eds.), The Archaeology of Plural and Changing Identities, Kluwer Academic/Plenum, New York, pp. 191–210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Jamieson, R. W. (2005). Caste in Cuenca: Colonial identity in the seventeenth century Andes. In Casella, E. C., and Fowler, C. (eds.), The Archaeology of Plural and Changing Identities, Kluwer Academic/Plenum, New York, pp. 211–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Kehoe, A. B. (1999). A resort to subtler contrivances. In Sweely, T. L. (ed.), Manifesting Power: Gender and the Interpretation of Power in Archaeology, Routledge, London, pp. 30–48.Google Scholar
  49. Kelso, G. K. (1996). Pollen analysis in urban historical landscape research. In De Cunzo, L. A., and Herman, B. L. (eds.), Historical Archaeology and the Study of American Culture, University of Tennessee Press, Knoxville, pp. 259–284.Google Scholar
  50. Kolodny, A. (1975). The Lay of the Land: Metaphor as Experience and History in American Life and Letters, University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill.Google Scholar
  51. Kovacik, J. J. (2002). Radical agency, households, and communities: Networks of power. In O’Donovan, M. (ed.), The Dynamics of Power, Center for Archaeological Investigations, Southern Illinois University, Carbondale, pp. 51–66.Google Scholar
  52. Kwolek-Folland, A. (2002). Incorporating Women: A History of Women and Business in the United States, Palgrave, New York.Google Scholar
  53. Larsen, C. (2006). The penny pinch. In Dubeck, P. J., and Dunn, D. (eds.), Workplace/Women’s Place: An Anthology, Roxbury, Los Angeles, pp. 77–83.Google Scholar
  54. Lucas, G. (1999). The archaeology of the workhouse: The changing uses of the workhouse buildings at St Mary’s, Southampton. In Tarlow, S., and West, S. (eds.), The Familiar Past: Archaeologies of Later Historical Britain, Routledge, London, pp. 125–139.Google Scholar
  55. Marquardt, W. H., and Crumley, C. L. (1987). Theoretical issues in the analysis of spatial patterning. In Crumley, C. L., and Marquardt, W. H. (eds.), Regional Dynamics: Burgundian Landscapes in Historical Perspective, Academic, San Diego, pp. 1–18.Google Scholar
  56. McDonald, J. D., Zimmerman, L. J., McDonald, A. L., Tall Bull, W., and Rising Sun, T. (1991). The Northern Cheyenne Outbreak of 1879: Using oral history and archaeology as tools of resistance. In McGuire, R. H., and Paynter, R. (eds.), The Archaeology of Inequality, Blackwell, London, pp. 64–78.Google Scholar
  57. McKee, L. (1996). The archaeology of Rachel’s garden. In Yamin, R., and Metheny, K. B. (eds.), Landscape Archaeology: Reading and Interpreting the American Historical Landscape, University of Tennessee Press, Knoxville, pp. 70–91.Google Scholar
  58. Meskell, L. (1996). The somatization of archaeology: Institutions, discourses, corporeality. Norwegian Archaeological Review 29: 1–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Meskell, L. (2001). Archaeologies of identity. In Hodder, I. (ed.), Archaeological Theory Today, Polity Press, Oxford, pp. 187–213.Google Scholar
  60. Metheny, K. B., Kratzer, J., Yentsch, A. E., and Goodwin, C. M. (1996). Method in landscape archaeology: Research strategies in a historic New Jersey garden. In Yamin, R., and Metheny, K. B. (eds.), Landscape Archaeology: Reading and Interpreting the American Historical Landscape, University of Tennessee Press, Knoxville, pp. 6-32.Google Scholar
  61. Miller, D., and Tilley, C. (eds.) (1984). Ideology, Power, and Prehistory, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  62. Mohanty, C. T. (1991). Introduction—cartographies of struggle: Third World women and the politics of feminism. In Russo, A., Lordes, T., and Mohanty, C. T. (eds.), Third World Women and the Politics of Feminism, Indiana University Press, Bloomington, pp. 1–51.Google Scholar
  63. Morris, W. (ed.) (1969). The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, American Heritage, New York.Google Scholar
  64. Mrozowski, S. A. (2006). Environments of history: Biological dimensions of historical archaeology. In Hall, M., and Silliman, S. W. (eds.), Historical Archaeology, Blackwell, Malden, MA, pp. 23–41.Google Scholar
  65. Mrozowski, S. A., and Beaudry, M. C. (1990). Archaeology and the landscape of corporate ideology. In Kelso, W. M., and Most, R. (eds.), Earth Patterns: Essays in Landscape Archaeology, University of Virginia Press, Charlottesville, pp. 189–208.Google Scholar
  66. Mullins, P. R. (1999). Race and Affluence: An Archaeology of African America and Consumer Culture, Kluwer Academic/Plenum, New York.Google Scholar
  67. Nassaney, M. S., Rotman, D. L., Sayers, D. O., and Nickolai, C. A. (2001). The Southwest Michigan Historic Landscape Project: Exploring class, gender, and ethnicity from the ground up. International Journal of Historical Archaeology 5: 219–261.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. O’Donovan, M. (2002). Grasping power: A question of relations and scales. In O’Donovan, M. (ed.), The Dynamics of Power, Center for Archaeological Investigations, Southern Illinois University, Carbondale, pp. 19–34.Google Scholar
  69. Orser Jr., C. E. (1987). Plantation status and consumer choice: A materialist framework for historical archaeology. In Spencer-Wood, S. M. (ed.), Consumer Choice in Historical Archaeology, Plenum Press, New York, pp. 121–138.Google Scholar
  70. Orser Jr., C. E. (1988). Toward a theory of power for historical archaeology: Plantations and space. In Leone, M. P., and Potter Jr., P. B. (eds.), The Recovery of Meaning: Historical Archaeology in the Eastern United States, Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington D.C., pp. 313–344.Google Scholar
  71. Orser Jr., C. E. (1996). A Historical Archaeology of the Modern World, Plenum Press, New York.Google Scholar
  72. Palus, M. M., Leone, M. P., and Cochran, M. D. (2006). Critical archaeology: Politics past and present. In Hall, M., and Silliman, S. W. (eds.), Historical Archaeology, Blackwell, Malden, MA, pp. 84–107.Google Scholar
  73. 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. 159–178.Google Scholar
  74. Pauls, E. P. (2006). The place of space: Architecture, landscape and social life. In Hall, M., and Silliman, S. W. (eds.), Historical Archaeology, Blackwell, Malden, MA, pp. 65–84.Google Scholar
  75. Paynter, R. (1982). Models of Spatial Inequality: Settlement Patterns in Historical Archeology, Academic, New York.Google Scholar
  76. Paynter, R., and McGuire, R. H. (1991). The archaeology of inequality: Material culture, domination, and resistance. In McGuire, R. H., and Paynter, R. (eds.), The Archaeology of Inequality, Blackwell, London, pp. 1–27.Google Scholar
  77. Piddock, S. (2001). “An irregular and inconvenient pile of buildings”: The destitute asylum of Adelaide, South Australia and the English workhouse. International Journal of Historical Archaeology 5: 73–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Pluciennik, M., Mientjes, A., and Giannitrapant, E. (2004). Archaeologies of aspiration: historical archaeology in rural central Sicily. International Journal of Historical Archaeology 8: 27–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Rabinow, R. (1984). The Foucault Reader, Pantheon, New York.Google Scholar
  80. Rotman, D. L. (2003). Introduction: Exploring shared spaces and divided places on the American historical landscape. In Rotman, D. L., and Savulis, E. (eds.), Shared Spaces and Divided Places: Material Dimensions of Gender Relations and the American Historical Landscape, University of Tennessee Press, Knoxville, pp. 1–23.Google Scholar
  81. Rotman, D. L., and Nassaney, M. S. (1997). Class, gender and the built environment: Deriving social relations from cultural landscapes in southwest Michigan. Historical Archaeology 31(2): 42–62.Google Scholar
  82. Rubin, G. (1984). Thinking sex: Notes for a radical theory of the politics of sexuality. In Vance, C. S. (ed.), Pleasure and Danger: Exploring Female Sexuality, Routledge and Kegan Paul, Boston, pp. 267–319.Google Scholar
  83. Russell, L. (2005). Either, or, neither, nor”: Resisting the production of gender, race and class dichotomies in the pre-colonial period. In Casella, E. C., and Fowler, C. (eds.), The Archaeology of Plural and Changing Identities, Kluwer Academic/Plenum, New York, pp. 33–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Said, E. W. (1989). Foucault and the imagination of power. In Hoy, D. C. (ed.), Foucault: A Critical Reader, Blackwell, Oxford, pp. 149–157.Google Scholar
  85. Sayers, D. O., and Nassaney, M. S. (1999). Antebellum landscapes and agrarian political economies: Modeling progressive farmsteads in southwest Michigan. The Michigan Archaeologist 45(3): 74–117.Google Scholar
  86. Scott, E. M. (1991). Fort Michilimackinaw. Historical Archaeology 24(1): 42–54.Google Scholar
  87. Scott, E. M. (1994). Those of Little Note: Gender, Race, and Class in Historical Archaeology, University of Arizona Press, Tucson.Google Scholar
  88. Scott, D. D. (2003). Oral tradition and archaeology: Conflict and concordance examples from two Indian war sites. Historical Archaeology 37(3): 55–66.Google Scholar
  89. Scott, E. M. (2004). Introduction: Gender research in African American archaeology. In Galle, J. E., and Young, A. L. (eds.), Engendering African American Archaeology, University of Tennessee Press, Knoxville, pp. 1–19.Google Scholar
  90. Seifert, D. (1991). Introduction. Historical Archaeology 24(1): 1–3.Google Scholar
  91. Shackel, P. A. (ed.) (2003). Remembering landscapes of conflict. Historical Archaeology 37(3): 1–148.Google Scholar
  92. Shanks, M., and Tilley, C. (1992). Re-constructing Archaeology: Theory and Practice, Routledge, London.Google Scholar
  93. Silliman, S. W. (2006). Struggling with labor, working with identities. In Hall, M., and Silliman, S. W. (eds.), Historical Archaeology, Blackwell, Malden, MA, pp. 147–167.Google Scholar
  94. Singleton, T. A. (1988). An archaeological framework for slavery and emancipation, 1740–1880. In Leone, M. P., and Potter Jr., P. B. (eds.), The Recovery of Meaning: Historical Archaeology in the Eastern United States, Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington D.C., pp. 345–370.Google Scholar
  95. Spencer-Wood, S. M. (1978). Part IV. Overview of Regional Cultural Development. C. Historic. In Casjens, L. (ed.), A Cultural Resource Overview of the Green Mountain National Forest, Vermont, Institute for Conservation Archaeology, Peabody Museum, Harvard University, Cambridge, pp. 53–86.Google Scholar
  96. Spencer-Wood, S. M. (1980). Section II. Documentary Research. In Final Report/Data Recovery Operations at the Shaw (Moose Hill Reservoir) Site, Upper Quaboag Watershed, Massachusetts, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C., pp. 9–79.Google Scholar
  97. Spencer-Wood, S. M. (1981). The Shaw gristmill and house sites, Leicester, Massachusetts. Archaeological Quarterly 4: 1–30.Google Scholar
  98. Spencer-Wood, S. M. (1987). A survey of domestic reform movement sites in Boston and Cambridge, c. 1865–1905. Historical Archaeology 21(2): 7–36.Google Scholar
  99. Spencer-Wood, S. M. (1991a). Towards an historical archaeology of materialistic domestic reform. In McGuire, R. M., and Paynter, R. (eds.), The Archaeology of Inequality, Blackwell Oxford, pp. 231–286.Google Scholar
  100. Spencer-Wood, S. M. (1991b). Towards a feminist historical archaeology of the construction of gender. In Walde, D., and Willows, N. D. (eds.), The Archaeology of Gender: Proceedings of the 22nd Chacmool Conference, University of Calgary Archaeological Association, Calgary, pp. 234–44.Google Scholar
  101. Spencer-Wood, S. M. (1992). A feminist program for non-sexist archaeology. In Wandsnider, L. (ed.), Quandaries and Quests: Visions of Archaeology’s Future, Southern Illinois University Press, Carbondale, pp. 98–114.Google Scholar
  102. Spencer-Wood, S. M. (1993). Review of The Recovery of Meaning: Historical Archaeology in the Eastern United States, by Mark P. Leone and Parker B. Potter. Bulletin of the History of Archaeology 3(1): 27–35.Google Scholar
  103. Spencer-Wood, S. M. (1994a). Turn of the century women’s organizations, urban design, and the origin of the American playground movement. Landscape Journal 13: 125–138.Google Scholar
  104. Spencer-Wood, S. M. (1994b). Diversity in 19th-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.Google Scholar
  105. Spencer-Wood, S. M. (1995). Toward the further development of feminist historical archaeology. World Archaeological Bulletin 7: 118–136.Google Scholar
  106. Spencer-Wood, S. M. (1996). Feminist historical archaeology and the transformation of American culture by domestic reform movements, 1840–1925. In De Cunzo, L. A., and Herman, B. L. (eds.), Historical Archaeology and the Study of American Culture, Winterthur Museum and University of Tennessee Press, Knoxville, pp. 397–446.Google Scholar
  107. Spencer-Wood, S. M. (1997). Feminist Inclusive Theory: Crossing Boundaries in Theory and Practice. Paper delivered at the Fourth Australian Women in Archaeology Conference, Cairns, Australia.Google Scholar
  108. Spencer-Wood, S. M. (1999a). Gendering power. In Sweely, T. L. (ed.), Manifesting Power: Gender and the Interpretation of Power in Archaeology, Routledge, London, pp. 175–183.Google Scholar
  109. Spencer-Wood, S. M. (1999b). The formation of ethnic-American identities: Jewish communities in Boston. In Funari, P. P. A., Hall, M., and Jones, S. (eds.), Historical Archaeology: Back from the Edge, Routledge, London, pp. 284–307.Google Scholar
  110. Spencer-Wood, S. M. (2000). Strange attractors: Feminist theory, non-linear systems theory, and their implications for archaeological theory. In Schiffer, M. B. (ed.), Social Theory in Archaeology, University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City, pp. 112–25.Google Scholar
  111. Spencer-Wood, S. M. (2001a). Phase I Non-Destructive Archaeological Survey of the Souther Tide Mill Site, Quincy, Massachusetts, Massachusetts Historical Commission, Boston.Google Scholar
  112. Spencer-Wood, S. M. (2001b). Views and commentaries: What difference does feminist theory make? International Journal of Historical Archaeology 5: 97–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  113. Spencer-Wood, S. M. (2002a). Utopian visions and architectural designs of turn-of-the-century social settlements. In Bingaman, A., Shapiro, L., and Zorach, R. (eds.), Embodied Utopias: Gender, Social Change and the Modern Metropolis. Routledge, London, pp. 116–132.Google Scholar
  114. Spencer-Wood, S. M. (2002b). Feminist theory. In Orser Jr., C. E. (ed.), Encyclopedia of Historical Archaeology, Routledge, London, pp. 205–9.Google Scholar
  115. Spencer-Wood, S. M. (2002c). The historical archaeology of 19th-century American cultural landscapes: A review. Landscape Journal 21: 173–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  116. Spencer-Wood, S. M. (2003). Gendering the creation of green urban landscapes at the turn of the century. In Rotman, D. L., and Savulis, E. (eds.), Shared Spaces and Divided Places: Material Dimensions of Gender Relations and the American Historical Landscape, University of Tennessee Press, Knoxville, pp. 24–61.Google Scholar
  117. Spencer-Wood, S. M. (2004a). 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.Google Scholar
  118. Spencer-Wood, S. M. (2004b). What difference does feminist theory make in researching households? A commentary. 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. 235–253.Google Scholar
  119. Spencer-Wood, S. M. (2005). Feminist boundary crossings: Challenging androcentric assumptions and stereotypes about hideworking. In Frink, L., and Weedman, K. (eds.), Gender and Hide Production, Altamira, Walnut Creek, CA, pp. 197–213.Google Scholar
  120. Spencer-Wood, S. M. (2006). A feminist theoretical approach to the historical archaeology of utopian communities. Historical Archaeology 40(1): 152–185.Google Scholar
  121. Spencer-Wood, S. M. (2007). Feminist theory and gender research in historical archaeology. In Nelson, S. M. (ed.), Women in Antiquity: Theoretical Approaches to Gender and Archaeology, Altamira Press, Walnut Creek, CA, pp. 29–74.Google Scholar
  122. Spencer-Wood, S. M. (2009). A feminist approach to European ideologies of poverty and the institutionalization of the poor in Falmouth, Massachusetts. In Beisaw, A., and Gibb, J. (eds.), The Historical Archaeology of Institutional Life, University of Alabama Press, Tuscaloosa, pp. 117–137.Google Scholar
  123. Starbuck, D. R. (2003). Neither Plain Nor Simple: New Perspectives on the Canterbury Shakers, University Press of New England, Lebanon, New Hampshire.Google Scholar
  124. Stewart-Abernathy, L. C. (2004). Separate kitchens and intimate archaeology: Constructing urban slavery on the antebellum cotton frontier in Washington, Arkansas. 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. 51–74.Google Scholar
  125. Stoler, A. L. (ed.) (2006). Haunted by Empire: Geographies of Intimacy in North American History, Duke University Press, Durham.Google Scholar
  126. Sweely, T. L. (1999). Introduction. In Sweely, T. L. (ed.), Manifesting Power: Gender and the Interpretation of Power in Archaeology, Routledge, London, pp. 1–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  127. Symonds, J. (1999). Toiling in the vale of tears: Everyday life and resistance in South Uist, Outer Hebrides 1760-1860. International Journal of Historical Archaeology 3: 101–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  128. Voss, B. L. (2008). The Archaeology of Ethnogenesis: Race and Sexuality in Colonial San Francisco, University of California Press, Berkeley.Google Scholar
  129. Voss, B. L., and Schmidt, R. A. (2000). Archaeologies of sexuality: An introduction. In Schmidt, R. A., and Voss, B. L. (eds.), Archaeologies of Sexuality, Routledge, London, pp. 1–35.Google Scholar
  130. Wall, D. diZ. (1994). The Archaeology of Gender: Separating the Spheres in Urban America, Plenum Press, New York.Google Scholar
  131. Weber, M. (1947). The Theory of Social and Economic Organization. Parsons, T. (trans.). Free Press, New York.Google Scholar
  132. Wolf, E. (1990). Distinguished lecture: Facing power—old insights, new questions. American Anthropologist 92: 586–596.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  133. Wylie, A. (1992). Feminist theories of social power: Some implications for a processual archaeology. Norwegian Archaeological Review 25(1): 51–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  134. Yentsch, A. E. (1991). The symbolic divisions of pottery: Sex-related attributes of English and Anglo-American household pots. In McGuire, R. M., and Paynter, R. (eds.), The Archaeology of Inequality, Blackwell, Cambridge, pp. 192–230.Google Scholar
  135. Yentsch, A. E. (1994). A Chesapeake Family and Their Slaves: A Study in Historical Archaeology, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  136. Yentsch, A. E. (1996). Introduction: Close attention to place, landscape studies by historical archaeologists. In Yamin, R., and Metheny, K. B. (eds.), Landscape Archaeology: Reading and Interpreting the American Historical Landscape, University of Tennessee Press, Knoxville, pp. xxiii–xlii.Google Scholar
  137. Young, A. (2003). Gender and landscape: A view from the plantation slave community. In Rotman, D. L., and Savulis, E. (eds.), Shared Spaces and Divided Places: Material Dimensions of Gender Relations and the American Historical Landscape, University of Tennessee Press, Knoxville, pp. 104–134.Google Scholar
  138. Zierden, M. A. (1996). The urban landscape, the work yard, and archaeological site formation processes in Charleston, South Carolina. In De Cunzo, L. A., and Herman, B. L. (eds.), Historical Archaeology and the Study of American Culture, The Henry Francis du Pont Winterthur Museum, Winterthur, pp. 285–318.Google Scholar
  139. Zierden, M. A. (2010). Landscape and Social Relations at Charleston Townhouse Sites (1770–1850). International Journal of Historical Archaeology. doi:10.1007/s10761-010-0124-8

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Sociology, Anthropology, and Social WorkOakland UniversityRochester HillsUSA
  2. 2.Peabody Museum of Archaeology and EthnologyHarvard UniversityCambridgeUSA

Personalised recommendations